I have three AlphaServer 2100 systems in storage in the UK
(Oxfordshire). The storage, however, is due to be demolished (soon, but
no fixed date).
I won't have room to store these three systems, so if anyone would be
interested in offering them a home, then please get in touch!
I can probably get some pictures in the next day or two.
These systems were SMP Alphas and could sport as many as 4 CPUs. I'm not
sure of the configuration of these systems but I can probably find that
out soon.
They have not been run since ~2003 so they may be in need of some TLC.
OTOH they are not rusted to death so you have a chance of getting them
back to life.
Just so you know what you might be dealing with these systems are about:
700mm H x 430mm W x 810mm L.
I can't find the weight in any of my references right now but they are
very heavy. Three people can move them up a slight slope with some
effort but you would not successfully lift it into a car (assuming that
it would fit). I'm planning to dismantle them to move them (i.e. remove
PSU/PSUs etc. until they are light enough to move). A tail-lift would
probably be the sane way to go (and is, indeed, how they got to their
current location.
I'm hoping that someone can step forward and offer one or more of these
machines a new home. Please contact me off-list (once you're sure you
understand what you are getting into :-)).
Antonio
--
Antonio Carlini
antonio at acarlini.com
I am trying to test a couple of H745 regulators with a DC bench PSU and I am
having some problems with testing them.
My bench PSU is a twin unit so I can supply the +15V required as well as the
"AC" input using 20VDC from the other half of the bench PSU. The problem is
that I don't think the bench PSU can supply enough startup current to allow
the regulator to run. It can only supply 5A max.
I have seen with the H744s that if I put too big a load on them, then they
can't start because of the heavy startup current required. I can start them
with a lower load and then add load once the regulator is running without
breaching the current limit of the PSU.
With the H745s I have tried reducing the load to see if I can get them to
start, but a 10R load appears to be too much and the regulators draw the
full 5A without outputting -15V.
I have two H745s, both exhibit the same behaviour. I suppose they could both
have the same fault, but I am inclined to think that perhaps they need a
higher startup current than I can supply. Can anyone confirm this?
Thanks
Rob
There is a discussion of the origin of the term "partition" in storage
devices such as HDDs at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Disk_partitioning#Where_did_the_term_%22p
artition%22_originate?
It seems clear it was used in memory well before HDDs but when it got
started there is unclear.
* IBM PC DOS v2 was an early user in 1983 with FDISK and its first PC
support of HDDs
* UNIX, Apple OS's and IBM mainframe all seem to come later.
Partitioning as a "slice" probably predates IBM PC DOS v2
Would appreciate some recollections about DEC usage, other minicomputers and
the BUNCH.
You can either post directly to Wikipedia or let me know; links to
references would greatly be appreciated
Tom
> From: Paul Koning
> When did Unix first get partitions?
'Partitions' the mechanism, or partitions the term for the mechanism?
The former appeared about V5:
https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V5/usr/sys/dmr/rp.c
when an RP03 was added; pre-V7, UNIX filesystems were limited to 2^16 blocks,
so the 406*10*20 blocks of an RP03 had to be split up into partitions (called
'sections' or 'pseudo-disks' in the documentation) to make all of it useable.
The latter? No idea...
Partitions may have appeared in DOS/Windows for much the same reason; with 32
KB clusters, FAT16 filesystems were limited to 2GB. I distinctly recall
having to use partitions when I bought a 13GB hard drive for my Windows 95
machine (FAT32 only came in with Windows 95 OSR2).
Noel
A somewhat broader search found the 1984 RT-11 System Release Notes with the following:
1.4.2.4 Logical Disk Subsetting Handler (LD) - The logical disk subsetting handler lets you define logical disks, which are subsets of physical disks. You define logical disks by assigning a logical disk unit number to a file on a physical disk. You can then use the logical disk as though it were a physical disk.
AA-5286F-TC-T1_RT-11_System_Release_Notes_Jul84.pdf (bitsavers.org) <http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp11/rt11/v5.1_Jul84/AA-5286F-TC-T1_RT-11…> p15/102
Suggests DEC had not yet adopted the term ?partition? for a segment of a disk
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Gardner [mailto:tom94022 at comcast.net]
FWIW a Google search: "partition site:http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp11/rt11" returns no relevant hits prior to 1983
I suspect that ESDI and MFM controllers emulating RL/RK disks are also later than 1983
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: Zane Healy [ <mailto:healyzh at avanthar.com> mailto:healyzh at avanthar.com]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 12:40 PM
To: Paul Koning; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Cc: <mailto:t.gardner at computer.org> t.gardner at computer.org; Tom Gardner
Subject: Re: Origin of "partition" in storage devices
On Jan 31, 2022, at 11:28 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk < <mailto:cctalk at classiccmp.org> cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> Both of these are memory partitions. The only OS I can think of predating the ones you mentioned is RT-11, the later versions (V2 did not have them). When did Unix first get partitions?
>
> paul
Partitions are pretty important in RT-11 v5.x, after all, there is the partition size limit, so you have to have multiple partitions for almost any HD, except very small ones.
Let?s not forget hardware enforced partitioning, the WEQSD/04 ESDI controller comes to mind. It see?s a single large ESDI HD as a single disk, but you can partition it on the controller, and the OS sees each partition as a separate physical disk. I seem to remember some MFM controllers that made the MFM drive appear to be RL01/RL02 or RK05 packs.
Zane
> From: Bob Smith
> the original UART was designed by DEC, Vince Bastiani was the project
> lead and designer, Gordon Bell was behind the project, and it may have
> been his idea.
"Computer Engineering: A DEC View of Hardware Systems Design" covers this, in
a footnote on pg. 73.
I seem to recall reading that Ken Olsen was involved in doing early modem
work (presumably on Whirlwind), but maybe my memory is failing, and it was
someone else (like Bell, or someone). Too busy to research it at the moment...
Noel
While moving some things around I found the following:
7 M8588
6 M8591
6 M8592
4 M8593
14 M8594
All appear to be NOS.
I also found :
G103
G222
G223
M911
Which I did not count, and they seem to be memory related, but I
haven't checked to see which memory they are from. If you have any interest
please contact me off list.
Thanks, Paul
> From: Chris Zach
> Maybe that is the dhv11.
The DH11, DHV11 and DHU11 are all very similar, although not 100.00% program compatible.
(The DHQ11 can be set to exactly emulate either the DHV11 or DHU11.) So, all provide
DMA output, but not DMA input.
Differences with the DH11 include two full word registers for DMA address,
hardware ^S/^Q support, built-in diagnostics, etc. The DHV11 and DHU11 differ
in hardware echo, output FIFO, a fix for the infamous DH11 input silo level
bug, etc.
Noel
In order to further the effort of scanning and preserving ALL of the
things, I picked up a Canon Microfilm Scanner 300 for $cheap. It has
a SCSI interface and doesn't work with anything past Windows XP, but
that's not a problem. What is a problem is that Canon's link to the
XP driver is a big 4 0 4:
https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support/details/scanners/…
By any chance, does someone out there have this driver? The filename
in question is "300350DRIT_V11.exe". You can google that name and end
up either back at Canon's site or in Malware Hell ("just download this
Chrome plugin to get your driver!").
Note that this is not the Canon Microfilm Scanner 300-II, which is a
USB device and uses a different driver.
Thanks for any leads...
jt
IIRC, John Mac was the designer for the DHQ/DHV. If my memory is
correct, after DH was done, John had the idea of a mix and match
synchronous/Async mux and came up with those designs. I dont remember
who was on his team. COMMS 11 group had led (farmed out) the designs
of the Sync version of a UART called USynRT in some parlance SIg 2652
and SMC 5027 IIFC. I ran the Signetics contract tech side. A fresh MIT
PhD was the Sig POC, and there are more stories about that. I cant
recall his name at this juncture.
bob
On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 1:00 PM <cctalk-request at classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> Send cctalk mailing list submissions to
> cctalk at classiccmp.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cctalk-request at classiccmp.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cctalk-owner at classiccmp.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cctalk digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products? (Noel Chiappa)
> 2. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products? (Paul Koning)
> 3. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products? (Chris Zach)
> 4. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products? (Glen Slick)
> 5. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products? (Noel Chiappa)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 15:58:53 -0500 (EST)
> From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
> Cc: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu
> Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products?
> Message-ID: <20220129205853.15EEA18C07B at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
>
> > From: Paul Koning
>
> > DH-11 is unusual in that it has DMA in both directions
>
> McNamara's DH11? (I don't know of another DECdevice of that name.) Per:
>
> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/unibus/EK-ODH11-OP-002_DH11_Asynchronous_1…
>
> it's DMA on output only; the input side has a FIFO that has to be emptied by the CPU.
>
> Noel
>
> PS: I am familiar with the term 'terminal concentrator' from the networking
> world, but as a generic term, not the name of a particular product. (Although
> Cisco's first boxes may have included a terminal concentrator, so named.)
>
> Noel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 17:12:41 -0500
> From: Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast.net>
> To: Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>, "cctalk at classiccmp.org"
> <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products?
> Message-ID: <684F1FCF-A6E6-4F3C-AC39-ADA1504FC9E1 at comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>
> > On Jan 29, 2022, at 3:58 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Paul Koning
> >
> >> DH-11 is unusual in that it has DMA in both directions
> >
> > McNamara's DH11? (I don't know of another DECdevice of that name.) Per:
> >
> > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/unibus/EK-ODH11-OP-002_DH11_Asynchronous_1…
> >
> > it's DMA on output only; the input side has a FIFO that has to be emptied by the CPU.
>
> Oh. That's amazing, all these years I thought it had DMA both ways. Clearly not. I wonder how I got that misunderstanding.
>
> paul
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 18:49:06 -0500
> From: Chris Zach <cz at alembic.crystel.com>
> To: Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast.net>, "General Discussion:
> On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>, Paul Koning via
> cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>, Noel Chiappa
> <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>, "cctalk at classiccmp.org"
> <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products?
> Message-ID: <24F062E4-8B26-4EB3-A573-B47C69A53B67 at alembic.crystel.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Maybe that is the dhv11. Or the dv11 I'll look it up tomorrow
>
> On January 29, 2022 5:12:41 PM EST, Paul Koning via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Jan 29, 2022, at 3:58 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> From: Paul Koning
> >>
> >>> DH-11 is unusual in that it has DMA in both directions
> >>
> >> McNamara's DH11? (I don't know of another DECdevice of that name.) Per:
> >>
> >> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/unibus/EK-ODH11-OP-002_DH11_Asynchronous_1…
> >>
> >> it's DMA on output only; the input side has a FIFO that has to be emptied by the CPU.
> >
> >Oh. That's amazing, all these years I thought it had DMA both ways. Clearly not. I wonder how I got that misunderstanding.
> >
> > paul
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 16:47:27 -0800
> From: Glen Slick <glen.slick at gmail.com>
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
> <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products?
> Message-ID:
> <CAM2UOwL2hi2Crm7ovphGd+UZFPePV+vUzoduan7a2a5Xo+eimw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/qbus/EK-DHQ11-UG-002.pdf
> DHQ11 User Guide, EK-DHQ11-UG.002
>
> The main application of the M3107 DHQ11 is for interactive terminal
> handling; it can also be used for data concentration and real-time
> processing. It has two programming modes, DHV11 and DHU11. The
> register sets in these modes are compatible with those of the DHV11
> and DHU11 respectively. The preferred mode of operation is DHU11 mode.
> The main features of the DHQ11 are:
>
> ? For transmission: DMA transfers; or for each line, program transfers
> to a 1 character transmit buffer in DHV11 mode, or to a 64-character
> transmit FIFO in DHU11 mode
>
> ? For receive: a 256-entry FIFO buffer for received characters,
> dataset status changes, and diagnostic information
>
> The M3118 CXA16 and the M3119 CXA08 have the same programming
> interface as the M3107 DHQ11
>
>
> The M3108 DSV11 can do DMA transfers in both directions, although it
> is a synchronous interface, not asynchronous.
>
> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/qbus/EK-DSV11-TM-001_Jan87.pdf
> DSV11 Technical Manual, EK-DSV11-TM-001
>
> Functional Description (Section 1.5). The DSV11 supports a range of
> synchronous protocols on the serial interface, and transfers data to
> and from the host by DMA transfer. This section describes the way in
> which the DSV11 handles data.
>
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 3:49 PM Chris Zach via cctalk
> <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe that is the dhv11. Or the dv11 I'll look it up tomorrow
> >
> > On January 29, 2022 5:12:41 PM EST, Paul Koning via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Jan 29, 2022, at 3:58 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> From: Paul Koning
> > >>
> > >>> DH-11 is unusual in that it has DMA in both directions
> > >>
> > >> McNamara's DH11? (I don't know of another DECdevice of that name.) Per:
> > >>
> > >> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/unibus/EK-ODH11-OP-002_DH11_Asynchronous_1…
> > >>
> > >> it's DMA on output only; the input side has a FIFO that has to be emptied by the CPU.
> > >
> > >Oh. That's amazing, all these years I thought it had DMA both ways. Clearly not. I wonder how I got that misunderstanding.
> > >
> > > paul
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2022 09:26:46 -0500 (EST)
> From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
> Cc: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu
> Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's
> products?
> Message-ID: <20220130142646.5614818C074 at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
>
> > From: Chris Zach
>
> > Maybe that is the dhv11.
>
> The DH11, DHV11 and DHU11 are all very similar, although not 100.00% program compatible.
> (The DHQ11 can be set to exactly emulate either the DHV11 or DHU11.) So, all provide
> DMA output, but not DMA input.
>
> Differences with the DH11 include two full word registers for DMA address,
> hardware ^S/^Q support, built-in diagnostics, etc. The DHV11 and DHU11 differ
> in hardware echo, output FIFO, a fix for the infamous DH11 input silo level
> bug, etc.
>
> Noel
>
>
> End of cctalk Digest, Vol 88, Issue 30
> **************************************
