Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OS/400 versus Unix

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OS/400 versus Unix

    You are correct.. I recently took a few Unix Class's and asked the same questions to my instructor. He showed me some command to change the priority of the jobs running in Unix, but its not the same as queueing on the AS400. I am not going to Bash Unix, but I am sure there maybe some tools available to solve your problem. I still like the AS400 very much and just don't understand why any would would switch because of the Increase Labor needed to support Unix.

  • #2
    OS/400 versus Unix

    Thanks for your response, Keith. I too, took a Unix class, but we never got too in depth with the work management piece. I was TOTALLY shocked that people still use the vi editor (which I now have to use). Talk about arcane! I will e-mail my instructor and see if he can help. I guess the command you refer to needs to be entered by an operator. Do you remember if it could be put in a script (like CHGJOB) to run unattended everytime the script was run? The more I see of this, the more I am amazed by it's lack of features / functionality, and manual-ness. I certainly do not understand why it is so popular. It seems very 70s ish to me. Certainly nowhere nears as automatic as the System/34/, System/36, and AS/400 computer systems were/are! Unbelieveable!!! I tell me co-workers who are still maintaining the 400 that "You don't know what you've got until you lose it!!". Doug.

    Comment


    • #3
      OS/400 versus Unix

      I hear ya ! To be honest, I don't remember the commands, but remember the same issue in class. Yes, the vi editor is a real joke, but the more I used it, the more I started to like it over time. I think contacting your instructor would be the best way to get answers. It is difficult to remember all those Unix Commands when I am on an AS400 all day, and only experienced Unix in Class. I plan on loading Red Hat on one of my PC's here to keep current as I have only a few more class's left to take, and I will be able to get my Certification. Not sure if I will ever use it, but it looks good on a Resume. I have the opinion that both OS's have a place, but I think the best hardware to run them would be the AS400. I would like to see a Unix Box with 20,000 users on it at one time, and see how it performs compared to our 2 840's. Plus we have 4 people supporting all of our AS400's vs. our Unix environment which has a lot.. lot.. more. Keith

      Comment


      • #4
        OS/400 versus Unix

        Keith, I am in the same boat as you. I took a Unix class, but was on the 400 until about three months ago. I don't remember much about Unix either. Everything here is so segmented and siloed, it's ridiculous. Forget the 20,000 users. We don't have nearly as many as that, and the servers crash at least once every week or two. AND we can't run production batch jobs until our client service center goes down for the day, because of the negative impact the batch jobs have on the service center screens. It's crazy to have to stay late to run these jobs. That's what queues and schedulers were invented for. I am taking a backwards step that I don't like. Our 400 application supported 24 clients in production, and test. We also had IVR and internet production and test running on the same server. No problems whatsoever. Now we have 7 production servers, 7 replication servers, 7 test servers, and 7 development servers. Also have two servers dedicated to processing long running client jobs. THAT'S EFFICIENT?? I don't even want to think about the personnel required to support that. That does not include our network servers. AAAHHH!! Thanks, Keith Doug.

        Comment


        • #5
          OS/400 versus Unix

          I rest my Case! I see the most efficiency running a large AS400 configured with LPAR running OS/400 and Linux. You will have the best of both worlds and reliable hardware. Have a Good Day.. Keith

          Comment


          • #6
            OS/400 versus Unix

            Keith, I am in the same boat as you. I took a Unix class, but was on the 400 until about three months ago. I don't remember much about Unix either. Everything here is so segmented and siloed, it's ridiculous. Forget the 20,000 users. We don't have nearly as many as that, and the servers crash at least once every week or two. AND we can't run production batch jobs until our client service center goes down for the day, because of the negative impact the batch jobs have on the service center screens. It's crazy to have to stay late to run these jobs. That's what queues and schedulers were invented for. I am taking a backwards step that I don't like. Our 400 application supported 24 clients in production, and test. We also had IVR and internet production and test running on the same server. No problems whatsoever. Now we have 7 production servers, 7 replication servers, 7 test servers, and 7 development servers. Also have two servers dedicated to processing long running client jobs. THAT'S EFFICIENT?? I don't even want to think about the personnel required to support that. That does not include our network servers. AAAHHH!! Thanks, Keith Doug.

            Comment


            • #7
              OS/400 versus Unix

              After doing one Unix project, I became a confirmed Unix-Hater. There was nothing that I could do without writing a script from scratch. This includes all of the things I took for granted on the 400. I later found out that a book was published detailing Unix user complaints about Unix. It's a bit dated, but should be required reading for anyone contemplating the use of Unix: The Unix Hater's Handbook by Garfinkel Weise and Strassmann published by IDG Books ISBN 1-56884-203-1 Dave

              Comment


              • #8
                OS/400 versus Unix

                I understand your dislike of your Unix environment, but I thinks it's just an example of a poorly implemented system. I bet you could have them all running on one box just like a 400 could have them running on one box. The box? an RS/6000. Bill Doug Englander wrote: > Keith, > > I am in the same boat as you. I took a Unix class, but was on the 400 > until about three months ago. I don't remember much about Unix > either. > > Everything here is so segmented and siloed, it's ridiculous. Forget > the 20,000 users. We don't have nearly as many as that, and the > servers crash at least once every week or two. AND we can't run > production batch jobs until our client service center goes down for > the day, because of the negative impact the batch jobs have on the > service center screens. It's crazy to have to stay late to run these > jobs. That's what queues and schedulers were invented for. I am > taking a backwards step that I don't like. > > Our 400 application supported 24 clients in production, and test. We > also had IVR and internet production and test running on the same > server. No problems whatsoever. Now we have 7 production servers, 7 > replication servers, 7 test servers, and 7 development servers. Also > have two servers dedicated to processing long running client jobs. > THAT'S EFFICIENT?? I don't even want to think about the personnel > required to support that. That does not include our network servers. > AAAHHH!! > > Thanks, Keith > > Doug.

                Comment


                • #9
                  OS/400 versus Unix

                  Thanks to all who participated in this. Keith, I e-mailed my instructor and he mentioned there was a command called "nice" that allows you to change a jobs priority. I will look into that. Bill, Thanks for the RS/6000 info. We had one where I used to work. I will send an e-mail to a programmer to get further information. Do you have Unix experience? Do you know of any functionality sucha as a jobq? Thanks again to all, you have been very helpful! Doug.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    OS/400 versus Unix

                    I am working at a company that has an AS/400 application that is scheduled on being retired in a year or two. The application will be reimplemented on a Unix host. An issue has come up regarding performance. It appears that the Unix OS does not allow a job priority to change, nor does it support a JOBQ. It seems that if 7 users each "nohup" a job, that 7 jobs will be executing. There is no way to submit the jobs to a queue and have them execute sequentially, one at a time. Is this how Unix works? I am used to a machine (AS/400, System/36, System/34) that I can control a job's priority (if needed) as well as submit jobs to a queue for (unattended) sequential execution. I am told that these two things (that I'd call 'givens') are not available. Is that how Unix is implemented in my shop, or does Unix not give a system operator that type of control? Thank you, Doug.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      OS/400 versus Unix

                      P.S. Thanks also to David for the book reference. I'll see if I can locate a copy! Doug.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        OS/400 versus Unix

                        Doug Englander wrote: > Bill, Thanks for the RS/6000 info. We had one where I used to work. I > will send an e-mail to a programmer to get further information. Do > you have Unix experience? Do you know of any functionality sucha as a > jobq? No, unfortunately (or fortunately), I don't have any experience with it. The RS/6000 shares many of the same components as the 400, so the hardware will be pretty dependable. Of course, you could run Unix on the 400 as well with the 400's ability to run executables - rather or not this would allow you to use job queues, I wouldn't know. Bill

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X