I worked on a production 7060 (MP3000) H30 for several years.  We did not use 
the internal 
DASD.  The H30 was connected, via ESCON, to a 2105.  The only thing emulated on 
that box was
the OSA, which used the Ethernet card(s) on the PC.  Was it better than a z800 
or z900, definitely
not!  But that was all the organization could afford at that time.  It served 
us for almost eight
years.  We ran a production and test CICS region, TSO/ISPF, and batch.   

Heck, when we converted to z/OS 1.4 from OS/390 2.10, I actually created a 
Integrated Coupling
Facility LPAR, and SYSPLEX'ed the production OS/390 2.10 LPAR to a test z/OS 
1.4 LPAR for testing
purposes.  

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf 
Of Tony Harminc
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 11:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LzLabs in ComputerWorld

On 13 December 2016 at 10:34, R.S. <[email protected]> wrote:

> I dare to disagree.

My turn...

> Although MP3000 was better than MP2000, it was still nothing good.

It was *much* better than the MP2000. Very much faster. It was a 390
G5 CPU. Even 2 x G5 on the top model (H50).

A note on the "development only" idea about this machine. There *were* 
development (PWD) models. We had one, at a much reduced price, and we also had 
a free "Linux option" that kept the model number unchanged (P30), but doubled 
the CPU speed and doubled the memory. IIRC the non-PWD models were H30 and H50.

> As a demonstration/learning/portable machine it was much to big.

Sure. The old P390s were about the best for that. But you could always connect 
remotely.

> As a production or development machine the I/O was really poor.

Well... Don't mix the two kinds of I/O. There was the P390/Integrated Server 
style of I/O, all done by OS/2 through the (16-bit!) drivers taken unchanged 
from the P390. This was used for OS/2's own purposes (C drive, etc.) and it was 
possible to map emulated 390 DASD to OS/2 files on this space, exactly as on 
P390. But the "real" DASD I/O was via an STI cable from the G5 CPU to a PCI 
card on the passive backplane. The array of SSA drives connected to the same 
PCI bus, and that I/O was done with no involvement of OS/2 or even the Intel 
CPU.

> No real channels except ESCON.

There was a parallel channel, but IIRC not supported for DASD. Tape and UR 
only. But did you really have old DASD that you wanted to connect via Bus & 
Tag? Maybe a 3380...

> No sysplex capability. A lot of SPOFs.

Yes - SPOF were a problem for a production shop. Though OS/2 could crash and be 
rebooted without crashing the G5. But who wants Sysplex on a machine that size, 
except a development shop (ISV)?

> z800 and followers were not much more expensive, but it's functionality was 
> significantly better.

z800 + DASD + network interface + TN3270/console support of some kind came out 
to a lot more money. But of course speed of a 64-bit program on the MP3000 = 0 
MIPS...

Tony H.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
[email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
FIRST TENNESSEE

Confidentiality notice: 
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged 
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or 
the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended 
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this 
e-mail message from your computer.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to