OpenVMS: state of the x86 port
vmssoftware.com
vmssoftware.com
IBM's AS/400 system (now called i series?) was designed for that from the start. There never was an AS/400 machine, it was always emulated. Programs started in the '80s are still running, migrated from one physical host generation to the next without ever being shut down.
I'm not an AS/400 expert, but did work in one of the largest AS/400 shops in the world for quite a while. The AS/400 folks definitely didn't live migrate apps CISC->RISC when they upgraded. Sat is lots of change management meetings there. Could they have? Dunno. But they sure operated like that was SOP.
It'd be nice to be able to run it in a VM and see how much I've forgotten. I've got an old workstation in my loft, but haven't really got the room to have it setup.
Still remember for old time sake do some 360 assemble on an emulator. Suddenly I aware that is 16 MB not GB ... and I use a 24 MB one to support thousands of users in 1980s.
Those really were the days.
The VMS help system, while far less verbose than Unix man pages was, thanks to its hierarchical organisation really, well, helpful.
My basic introduction was that my boss sat me in front of a VT220 terminal and told me about the HELP command.
Later I discovered the absolute awesomeness that was VMS (at that time, OpenVMS came later) documentation.
For me and to this day it's the benchmark how documentation should be written an organized.
That and developing in Vista4GL. I'd kill to get hold of some manuals for that to remind myself what my first professional language was like.
I bet VMS's versioning could have been the foundation for a fast, powerful and reliable de-dupe too. Hmm...
I hammer at OpenVMS for 40+ hours/week and this is exciting!
We hit 99.99% uptime with new software features being installed being the reason for the downtime we've had (except for one instance a bunch of years ago, but at that time I would have been in middle school. I do worry about a slowly increasing reaction time to user actions though.
Running on X86 we wouldn't have to worry about the future.
What's your work like? Or perhaps I should say, what kind of company do you work at to use it?
I'm the youngest and almost everyone is 2x+ my age. We've lost 40% of the team to retirements since I joined two years ago.
It's a tight team but communication is oh so inefficient whenever someone is working remote and between our two locations.
We have other services now that we make calls to to get for example mail and email sent to customers, but now and then I still see customers receiving plain text email from the production machine D:
I studied business and management. Maybe that will be a pro for a new role if they shut down the VMS.
http://www.wherry.com/gadgets/retrocomputing/vax-simh.html
And I guess the process of requesting and installing a license changes from time to time. This page describes a slightly different process for activating the license which worked for me:
https://meadhbh.hamrick.rocks/home/technical-sh-t/installing...
VMS had its pros and cons as compared to Unix/Linux. VMS' help system is really nice. However, VMS filenames are baroquely complex (yes, automatic versioning can be nice, but the rest of it was insane). Even at its height, VMS lost to Unix, and Unix plus Linux are now completely dominant in the areas VMS once filled and has had decades to fill in missing capabilities. I don't see what the big draw of VMS would be over Unix/Linux, at least enough to justify it. The world doesn't need another proprietary operating system, especially one incompatible with what people have now been doing for decades.
That would be my guess. I don't know how big VMS Software is, but I doubt they are that big. The market they are addressing is limited in size, and is almost certain to shrink rather than grow, so it would be difficult to justify a massive investment in developers.
OTOH, how long did the VAX->Alpha port take? How long did the Alpha->Itanium port take? How long would have HP taken if they'd decided to commit to an x86 port themselves?
http://www.dtjcd.vmsresource.org.uk/pdfs/dtj_v04-04_1992.pdf (page 113 of the PDF)
http://www.decus.de/events/alphamigration/vortraege/porting_...
It sounds like both took about two years to reach first boot on the target platform. Both involved considerably more people and resources than the VSI port to x86.
I don't know when they started it - but it was available to customers late 1994 if memory serves.
The Itanium port was announced Sep 2001? A usable version for customers to deal with - spring 2005?
What is behind OpenVMS project - nostalgia or some pragmatic reasons?
Features of VMS like transparent clustering are missing, for example.
Names can be quite different. I remember looking at the disk stack and thinking it looked quite similar, save for completion ports.
POSIX personality was the place for them.
Modern Windows follows mainframe's footsteps by providing UNIX compatibility via a VM environment.
vMotion is a sort of crude version of VMS live process migration between nodes.
The security model is very well thought out, beats rwxrwxrwx and setuid hands down. Versioning filesystem, and RMS means the filesystem is a simple database too.
DCL seems weird but all the commands work the same way, take the same arguments and so on. You can guess with a very high chance of being right. And if you can’t the help/error message is actually useful.
Rock solid stability. Generally very easy to manage, one sysadmin can do a lot.
What about Windows CLR/COM/UWP?
Curious about what you find being unmatched, as I never used VMS, beyond diving into its developer's documentation.
I don't know about how it works on VMS, but Microsoft's COM is the only other attempt of language interop I know of. Recently I implemented a COM server, added `IDispatch` to its interfaces and suddenly I could control and test it from Porwershell with no extra effort on my part. Like, magic.
VMS IPC was done via mailboxes, send a message to a person or a program was the same. Which sounds weird to anyone used to the way Unix does mail, but it worked very well.
(Yep, VAX BASIC was a serious language used for real, production applications)
Joke aside, I have no idea how VMS will be run on non hard-realtime hardware.
But... VMS does have some interesting features. Even if you prefer Linux, it's interesting to compare the two and read about why the VMS designers did what they did.
Last time I worked with OpenVMS was 2014 going into 2015. The system in question was an orders management system for an online pharmacy. It. Was. Hell. The Alpha-based cluster was being rebooted daily because it would run out of memory constantly. They would purchase spare parts for their cluster from a local company that specialized in NOS and recovered boards bought on eBay. We had some laughs about that!
The code was ancient--some of the earliest comments in the sources dated to the 1970s. There was no source control, no modern compiler, no debugger, no anything. We used sockets to communicate to a sort-of SOAP service to get data out for reporting but it was incredibly, tearfully s-l-o-w.
The UI was terrible. The users of it complained endlessly, and rightly so. We're talking about a time when most everything out there was built on a HTML Web-based system for at least a decade already and people were well used to Web interfaces. And here these poor souls were still using terminal emulators to connect to a green screen application and had to to have all kinds of odd work-arounds and policies to get by with all the bugs and strange anomalies. Did I mention the horrible uptime?
The management kept wanting more, more, more out of the enterpise Java team but all the technical limitation were on the VMS side. Meanwhile, the syadmin who ran it was a complete turd of a human being, only trying to keep his job there lest he be forced into retraining into some actually useful technology. Worse, he actively campaigned against any technical changes we wished to make (for fear of losing his fiefdom) and so undermined my team to the point where management became openly distrustful of us. "Can't trust that new-fangled Java stuff!" "You mean the actually reliable, high-performance stuff? That stuff?"
The company unbelievably doubled down on this odious mess by purchasing the source code for the system from the vendor that owned because that vendor wanted to wash their hands of it and get out from under the hell of supporting it. When I heard what my company paid for that code I nearly had a breakdown because it was eye-watering. I could have re-written the thing 5X over and extracted the data for that kind of coin. If that's the kind of idiocy it takes to manage a large corporation in America these days then I should be a CEO because I am far more than qualified! I could show up one day a week and do less damage. Had I had a free hand at that company I could have done incredible things, but it was not to be.
Worse still, now that they owned the sources, they thought they could do something useful with it and hired a contractor who had once sort of worked on this same trash at another firm. He was charging $250/hr to be there and was the most obnoxious developer I have ever worked around. He set the bar very low on personal hygiene, decorum, and general bad behavior around the office. They had to move him out of the cubes and give him his own room because of so many complaints about odors and um, noises.
Looking back, it seems like everything related to VMS was these kind of obnoxious people--I used to hang out with the sysadmins who managed the clusters at the college I attended and they, too, had that VMS/DEC obnoxiousness disease. I don't get it, I'll never get it, am happy to be far away from it. DEC had its day, they failed to adapt and modernize and went away. You don't see this same nostalgia for Wang Computers and Wang was the true original in the mini space.
It's not so much that it's relevant to everyone, but it's a super interesting topic watching it get ported.
Also... VMS makes sense in a way that Unix never did.