On 2013-02-13 18:52, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote: On Feb 13, 2013, at 11:12 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote: On 2013-02-13 16:09, Clem Cole wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> wrote: Well, the 11/70 easily outlived the 11/44, in that 11/70 machines were still sold after the 11/44 was terminated, as far as I know. Interesting data. I'm a little surprised to hear it because DEC was clearly trying to get the traditional 11/70 customer to move to the VAX line in those days. Oh, DEC tried. It was just that the VAXen didn't deliver the goods for all customers. The real pain point was realtime stuff. Interrupt latencies on a VAX is horrible compared to a PDP-11. And VMS don't help. I still have an RT-32 button from when the RT-11 folks were subversively pushing the notion that they could make a VAX do realtime. :-) I've posted it before, but the current comment in the RSX sources are fun: ;+ ; If we cannot process a clock interrupt within 10 seconds, we are ; no longer processing in real time, and we may as well become ; a VAX ... Call an end to this ... NOW! ;- BGCK$A BF.SAN,BE.IDC,<FATAL> ;;; System massively confused Fun detail: when devices want to MOP boot on a network where you have both a VAX and a PDP-11, the PDP-11 normally ends up serving the image, since it responds much faster than the VAX. That's because the VMS MOP server did its lookup for a match in the node database by a linear search. I never could convince the engineer responsible for that code to use a better algorithm. Which is silly in it self. Why even search the node database? After all, the MOP request holds all the information needed to serve it. RSX don't do a lookup at a boot request. It just serves it. But even so, it is surprising that even a fairly modern VAX can't keep up with a PDP-11 here. Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol