abnjh.490 Tapes on Unix

[usenet]

>> In other words, I want it to be as simple as it is in the new days, when UNIX
>> runs on micros and I physically hang my own tape, and set all the options and
>> push all the buttons myself.  And it is.  And I love it.
>> 
>> 		**THOSE DAYS ARE JUST BEGINNING**
>> 
>> 		Howard A. Landman
>> 		ogcvax!metheus!howard
>> 
>> 

Obviously Howard and I are coming at this thing from opposite ends of
the question.  I envy him his access to the hardware.  And he is, of
course, right that the statistical majority of UNIX systems in the
future (if not today -- I dont want to debate that point) will be
micros and super micros with single or very small numbers of users.
Nevertheless, I (and many other users of UNIX systems) do not have
such ready access to the hardware.  The larger number of users per
system for comp center type systems and the greater need for tapes
on such systems makes it problematical whether the statistical majority
of *tape* users in the future will be in his environment or mine.
But I dont want to debate that point either.  The point is that
anytime you have more than one user on the system (and that includes
even 'single user' systems like PC/IX if they run anything from the
cron or support uucp) you have the potential for resource contention.
Tape drives are a resource.  Even small systems can benefit from good
resource allocation software.  The current resource allocation software
for tape drives is inadequate not to say nonexistant.  If you dont
need it, you dont have to use it, but there are some of us who feel
the need, and would like to see some discussion of design alternatives
to give some guidance to the people at Berkeley and USG who are
working on the problem right now.

So far, the only proposals I have seen have been Howard's (Leave it
alone.  I like it the way it is.) and mine (Put an ioctl option into
the tape driver to allow manipulation of the hardware and software
state settings of the tape drive, and build resource control software
at the command level on that basis.)  Does anybody have a better
suggestion?

Rick Thomas
ihnp4!abnji!rbt   or   ihnp4!abnjh!usenet