26 Aug
2021
26 Aug
'21
2:48 p.m.
My next project once I finish my IBM 1410 FPGA implementation (so, a
couple of years out, probably) would be to write an emulator for the
boat anchor known as the IBM 8100. I had exposure to these things back
in the 1980s. The project was not really a success: the DPPX operating
system was way overkill for the underpowered machine, and wasn't
reliable enough or capable enough to run them at remote locations with
central administration.
The machine had some fairly sophisticated features:
Two groups of 64 sets of registers with 8 32 bit registers each
Auto increment and auto decrement indexed addressing
Address translation - but not paging
A primitive form of I/O channel
I have a set of install floppies for the DPPX operating system and some
of the associated software (but, sadly, not COBOL or Assembler), imaged,
and verified to contain what the labels say (via dd conv=ascii), but am
short on information.
(Of course, if someone else has floppies, all the better. I can image
them - they are 8" DSDD, with the first track single density, kinda like
an RX02).
I do have the Principles of Operation GA23-0031 and
the DASD devices (including floppy) Description GA23-0053
But in order to manage an emulator and actually install DPPX I would
need just a bit more hardware info - or I would be flying blind to some
degree as far as the operator panel I/O interaction.)
Hardware Manuals:
8130 Processor Description GA27-3196 and/or
8140 Processor Description GA27-2880
(There was also an 8150, but I doubt the releases I have would run on it.)
8140 Processor Operators Guide GA27-3197 and GA27-2879 (Expanded front
panel)
8101/8102 Storage / I/O Unit GA27-2882
Communications: Loop, Display, Printer: GA27-2883
(The "Loop" was a LAN like thing - kind of akin to the Apollo Domain
ring, off of which one hung local terminals, such as the IBM 8775).
Distributed Processing Programming Executive (DPPX) Manuals
Installation Primer: G320-6048
Installation Guide: SC27-0401
IPO Planning Guide: GC20-1883
Assembler: SC27-0412
Assembler Messages: SC27-0416
(The machine also supported APL, PL/I, COBOL (which we used), FORTRAN...
But I don't have floppies for those - heck, if the assembler wasn't
standard (I doubt it was), I don't even have that, even though we had it
at our installation, along with COBOL)
DTMS (database, transaction mgmt.)
Messages: SC26-3918
Customization Guide (SC26-3937)
Application Development Guide (SC26-3938)
Administration Guide (SC26-3939)
Operation Guide (SC26-3940)
Reference (SC26-3941)
True story: The early releases of DPPX were just awful buggy. We ended
up dedicating 3 conference rooms (with the dividers open) for a "warm
room" for something like 3 months, housing our personnel and IBM
personnel up from Texas. At one point one of the IBM'ers was overheard
on a public phone in the hallway of our public building telling someone
he was there "to help the hicks from Wisconsin". That got reported to
our management and to IBM's management, and he was on the next flight
back to Texas. ;)
On the flip side, I was testing database recovery (it was my thing, back
in the day - though we did not end up using the database / transaction
manager). I found some bugs in the database log journal recovery
process. I mentioned it to one of the IBM'ers in passing, also pointing
out it wasn't urgent since we were not going to use DTMS anyway, at
least not soon. He pretty much begged me to report it - and anything
else I found wrong. Completely polar opposite attitude of the guy in
the previous paragraph.
JRJ
26 Aug
26 Aug
5:54 p.m.
On 2021-08-26 6:48 p.m., Jay Jaeger via cctech wrote:
My next project once I finish my IBM 1410 FPGA
implementation (so, a
couple of years out, probably) would be to write an emulator for the
boat anchor known as the IBM 8100.? I had exposure to these things
back in the 1980s.? The project was not really a success: the DPPX
operating system was way overkill for the underpowered machine, and
wasn't reliable enough or capable enough to run them at remote
locations with central administration.
The machine had some fairly sophisticated features:
?? Two groups of 64 sets of registers with 8 32 bit registers each
?? Auto increment and auto decrement indexed addressing
?? Address translation - but not paging
?? A primitive form of I/O channel
True story:? The early releases of DPPX were just awful buggy.? We
ended up dedicating 3 conference rooms (with the dividers open) for a
"warm room" for something like 3 months, housing our personnel and IBM
personnel up from Texas.? At one point one of the IBM'ers was
overheard on a public phone in the hallway of our public building
telling someone he was there "to help the hicks from Wisconsin".? That
got reported to our management and to IBM's management, and he was on
the next flight back to Texas.? ;)
On the flip side, I was testing database recovery (it was my thing,
back in the day - though we did not end up using the database /
transaction manager).? I found some bugs in the database log journal
recovery process.? I mentioned it to one of the IBM'ers in passing,
also pointing out it wasn't urgent since we were not going to use DTMS
anyway, at least not soon.? He pretty much begged me to report it -
and anything else I found wrong.? Completely polar opposite attitude
of the guy in the previous paragraph.
JRJ
The 8100 came out during my first stint in field service, most of the
machines we saw where 8130s that ran the DPCX operating system and they
where purchased to replace 3790 distributed processors. We had one
customer who bought an 8140 and I helped with a model upgrade on it,
which involved removing all the logic gates as one unit and replacing
them with the upgraded one.? It would have been quicker and probably
cheaper to ship an entire new machine, but they where advertised as
field upgradeable so..... ? A few years later when I saw the inside of a
S/38 I recognized the packaging of the system as being identical to the
8140 except the 8140 did not have the built in CRT console or magazine
diskette drive. This 8140 was running DPPX but I don't know how the
customer got on with it as it was not my account.? It is said that the
8100 processor is the Universal Controller (UC), but I am hoping it was
a beefed up on from the UC engine that ran several of the "Industry
Systems" controllers such as 3274 (NDS), 3601 (Banking), and 3651
(retail store systems).
Paul.
28 Aug
28 Aug
12:11 p.m.
On 8/26/2021 7:54 PM, Paul Berger via cctalk wrote:
On 2021-08-26 6:48 p.m., Jay Jaeger via cctech wrote:
I had a look at the UC information on
bitsavers.org/pdf/IBM/microcontrollers, and also looked at some field
service material available on archive.org.
The CPU comprises several boards, so it wasn't UC per se. There was a
ROS-driven micro controller that handled instruction fetch and
branching, but it had 56 bit words per that field service material.
It may have had a similar software architecture to the UCs, but at
present from what I have seen the similarity seems to end their.
JRJ
My next project once I finish my IBM 1410 FPGA
implementation (so, a
couple of years out, probably) would be to write an emulator for the
boat anchor known as the IBM 8100.? I had exposure to these things
back in the 1980s.? The project was not really a success: the DPPX
operating system was way overkill for the underpowered machine, and
wasn't reliable enough or capable enough to run them at remote
locations with central administration.
The machine had some fairly sophisticated features:
?? Two groups of 64 sets of registers with 8 32 bit registers each
?? Auto increment and auto decrement indexed addressing
?? Address translation - but not paging
?? A primitive form of I/O channel
True story:? The early releases of DPPX were just awful buggy.? We
ended up dedicating 3 conference rooms (with the dividers open) for a
"warm room" for something like 3 months, housing our personnel and IBM
personnel up from Texas.? At one point one of the IBM'ers was
overheard on a public phone in the hallway of our public building
telling someone he was there "to help the hicks from Wisconsin".? That
got reported to our management and to IBM's management, and he was on
the next flight back to Texas.? ;)
On the flip side, I was testing database recovery (it was my thing,
back in the day - though we did not end up using the database /
transaction manager).? I found some bugs in the database log journal
recovery process.? I mentioned it to one of the IBM'ers in passing,
also pointing out it wasn't urgent since we were not going to use DTMS
anyway, at least not soon.? He pretty much begged me to report it -
and anything else I found wrong.? Completely polar opposite attitude
of the guy in the previous paragraph.
JRJ
The 8100 came out during my first stint in field service, most of the
machines we saw where 8130s that ran the DPCX operating system and they
where purchased to replace 3790 distributed processors. We had one
customer who bought an 8140 and I helped with a model upgrade on it,
which involved removing all the logic gates as one unit and replacing
them with the upgraded one.? It would have been quicker and probably
cheaper to ship an entire new machine, but they where advertised as
field upgradeable so..... ? A few years later when I saw the inside of a
S/38 I recognized the packaging of the system as being identical to the
8140 except the 8140 did not have the built in CRT console or magazine
diskette drive. This 8140 was running DPPX but I don't know how the
customer got on with it as it was not my account.? It is said that the
8100 processor is the Universal Controller (UC), but I am hoping it was
a beefed up on from the UC engine that ran several of the "Industry
Systems" controllers such as 3274 (NDS), 3601 (Banking), and 3651
(retail store systems).
Paul.
12:25 p.m.
On 8/28/21 12:11 PM, Jay Jaeger via cctalk wrote:
also looked at some field service material available on
archive.org.
Was this different from the docs I have on bitsavers?
They have all of bitsavers, but changed the filenames and screwed up the directory
heirarchy.
IA is a nightmare to search.
12:51 p.m.
On 8/28/2021 2:25 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
On 8/28/21 12:11 PM, Jay Jaeger via cctalk wrote:
The are indeed the same - I missed them because I only searched my own
mirror for the manual numbers when I went searching for 8100 stuff last
week. Should have looked in IndexByDate.txt (blush)
BTW, I have scanned the PoO and storage manuals yesterday, and they are
in the usual hierarchy I put stuff to contribute within.
JRJ
?also looked at some field service material available on archive.org.
Was this different from the docs I have on bitsavers?
They have all of bitsavers, but changed the filenames and screwed up the
directory heirarchy.
IA is a nightmare to search.
995
days inactive
997
days old
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
aek＠bitsavers.org -
cube1＠charter.net -
phb.hfx＠gmail.com