- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - OpenVMS
- >
- Re: F90 on Itanium vs F77 on AX
Operating System - OpenVMS
1753663
Members
5569
Online
108798
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
юдл
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
юдл
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-12-2009 07:42 AM
тАО01-12-2009 07:42 AM
Re: F90 on Itanium vs F77 on AX
Yes I see, for records/structures no individual member offsets seen, only the length.
So the structure length is the only (weak) indication of correct alignment.
For commons, all individual variable offsets are listed though.
So the structure length is the only (weak) indication of correct alignment.
For commons, all individual variable offsets are listed though.
http://www.mpp.mpg.de/~huber
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-12-2009 09:18 AM
тАО01-12-2009 09:18 AM
Re: F90 on Itanium vs F77 on AX
It would seem that the work-around for this loss of flexibility is to build a progeam in debug and then list all the addresses of the variables in the appropriate record using the EVALUATE/ADDRESS function in DEBUG. What a waste.
Thanks for all of your help, though!
Thanks for all of your help, though!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-12-2009 09:20 AM
тАО01-12-2009 09:20 AM
Re: F90 on Itanium vs F77 on AX
Do you think the HP engineers would consider putting /CROSS_REFERENCE back into F90???
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-12-2009 09:50 AM
тАО01-12-2009 09:50 AM
Re: F90 on Itanium vs F77 on AX
I'd look to use SDL data structure definitions if staying with OpenVMS, and toward using integrated data-based checksums here. Correctly done, a checksum can spot all manner of error. And it's verification at run-time, not compile time.
For a few projects, I've used SDL post-processing to determine that the offsets are maintained correctly across versions and updates. But the checksum and basic version checks at run-time catches cases where skews happen "live"...
I'd also tend to investigate RMS files with global buffers here, rather than continuing to use commons. Commons can and do work, but RMS works better in my experience; it deals with all the edge cases and cache management for you. (By the time you get done dealing with these cases, you end up re-implementing tracts of RMS.)
If you're currently running on VAX uniprocessors, then the addition of SMP has the potential here to expose all sorts of latent bugs, too. (Which is another reason to go to RMS...)
(Itanium boxes are massively faster than VAX boxes, so do try to avoid letting any of the older and classic design and performance assumptions of VAX creep in here. Not without specific verification.)
For a few projects, I've used SDL post-processing to determine that the offsets are maintained correctly across versions and updates. But the checksum and basic version checks at run-time catches cases where skews happen "live"...
I'd also tend to investigate RMS files with global buffers here, rather than continuing to use commons. Commons can and do work, but RMS works better in my experience; it deals with all the edge cases and cache management for you. (By the time you get done dealing with these cases, you end up re-implementing tracts of RMS.)
If you're currently running on VAX uniprocessors, then the addition of SMP has the potential here to expose all sorts of latent bugs, too. (Which is another reason to go to RMS...)
(Itanium boxes are massively faster than VAX boxes, so do try to avoid letting any of the older and classic design and performance assumptions of VAX creep in here. Not without specific verification.)
- « Previous
-
- 1
- 2
- Next »
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
News and Events
Support
© Copyright 2024 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP