Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihdev.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ihdev!pdg
From: pdg@ihdev.UUCP (P. D. Guthrie)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: 11/70 <-> uVax II link
Message-ID: <338@ihdev.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 30-Sep-85 15:17:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihdev.338
Posted: Mon Sep 30 15:17:41 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 2-Oct-85 07:38:48 EDT
References: <1486@uwmacc.UUCP> <440@rna.UUCP>
Reply-To: pdg@ihdev.UUCP (55224-P. D. Guthrie)
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 40

In article <440@rna.UUCP> dan@rna.UUCP (Dan Ts'o) writes:
>In article <1486@uwmacc.UUCP> jwp@uwmacc.UUCP (Jeffrey W Percival) writes:
>>We have a PDP 11/70 running 2.8BSD.  We are thinking of getting
>>a MicroVax II, and getting Berkeley Vax Unix to run on that.  Instead
>>of trying to get networking going on our 11/70, we thought we'd
>>get a Systems Industries disk and controller that will be shared
>>by the two machines.  Is this a reasonable approach?  Our
>>expectation is that file systems on the shared disk will be
>>accessible to users of both Unixes.  Are the 2.8/4.2 file systems
>>identical?  Can we just "mount" a shared file system on each of
>>the systems, so that the directories and files in that file
>>system appear in the directory paths of users on both machines?
>
>
>	- You are also screwed because even if they were two identical machines
>or filesystems, you could not mount them both read-write (and get away with it).
>As soon as one UNIX wrote the filesystem, modifying inodes and the freelist, the
>other would get mighty confused. Indeed, even mounting only one read-write is
>not a good idea, though probably not fatal. You could devise some kind of
>locking scheme to allow multiple read-write access. A lot of work. Just
>having both read only would be okay.
>
>	- Since the MicrovaxII is a Qbus machine, you will need a Qbus
>controller from System Industries that is format compatible with and can dual
>access with your Unibus SI controller. Most Qbus SMD controllers do heavy
>interleaving (3:1), more so than Unibus controllers, thus making the two
>not format compatible. Perhaps SI does, I don't know.
>

If I remember correctly from some junk mail from SI, they offer a system
for two Micro-vaxes to share the same disk drive. They must provide some
sort of device driver mods for both Ultrix and Vmess, I would expect, so
the above may be possible. What I would be interested in is if it would
be possible to format one partition VMS, and one Unix, and run each OS
on one machine. You then write a device driver for each OS to access the
partition and format of the other machine, allowing for quick and easy 
Unix <=> Vmess conversion, and of course, the advantages of both OS's
for your data. Any opinions?

					Paul Guthrie.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com