Talk:Houston Automatic Spooling Priority

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-Class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

Correct Meaning of Acronym[edit]

A google search on HASP and Houston reveals an amazing array of variations on the meaning of the acronym HASP. (e.g. Automated v. Automatic, Program v. Package). I don't have access to a definitive resource. I took my best guess at which one is correct and created redirect for the most common of the others (see "what links here"). If someone can establish definitively which was the official meaning of the acronym, feel free to move the text of the article and make this name a redirect as appropriate. -Metamusing 02:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

-- check out this link. I would consider it authoritative. http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/133/ibmsj1303E.pdf 158.96.100.224 18:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your research. The source you reference suggests "Houston Access Support Processor". If this was the original name, it doesn't seem to have stuck, since of 15 results returned by a google search with keywords: hasp houston site:ibm.com, only this one suggested these words. All the rest suggested a variation on Automatic and Spooling and either Package or Priority or Program. Still, we could create a page by that name and redirect it here. -Metamusing 20:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

-- I can't address the question of what the name was while HASP was still just NASA, but I can address the issue of what it was called when it was made available to other customers:

There is computer lore that "HASP" originally stood for "Half-ASP", but that IBM wouldn't allow that. TomS TDotO (talk) 16:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I coined the term Half-ASP in the 1970's, as a suggested slogan (HASP is Half-ASP) on a button. It's possible that someone came up with the term before me, but I would be very surprised if any of the HASP developers did. OTOH, if you came up with documentation for the claim then I believe it would belong in the history section of the article, not just on the talk page. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 00:01, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


Thanks. Much better than my "friend of a friend" story, which I heard in maybe the 1980s. I presume that you are amused to hear how your slogan has been transformed into "history". TomS TDotO (talk) 11:47, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but the slogan was obvious enough that I can't rule out someone else having coined it independently, possibly earlier.
See also Eight character tokenization is Mickey Mouse, where a prior coinage is unlikely. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 14:06, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Hello, everyone! It's great to find some mainframe geeks still alive! I must admit, though, the name of this page turned my head a bit, since I remember it (from the days of SVS and a boatload of QL mods) as Houston Automatic Spooling Program. In fact, the very reference discussed here (above) says, on page 195: "The Houston Automatic Spooling Package is an automatic SYSIN/SYSOUT/SYSPUNCH spooling package...", right underneath a heading that proclaims, "Houston Automatic Spooling Priority System". Hmmmmmm... When I saw that, I started wondering, "Typo? Confusion?". All I know is that we need a tiebreaker ref. I'm going to look through some boxes and see what I can find. I think I have a bunch of old IBM G and S manual in the basement. I'll post what I find. — UncleBubba T @ C ) 10:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

What citation? GC20-1619-8? SA22-7535-06? Assuming that you mean the catalog of programs, the program name shown on p. 195 for 360D-05.1.007 is HOUSTON AUTOMATIC SPOOLING PRIORITY SYSTEM; the program name shown on p. 197 for 360D-05.1.014 is HOUSTON AUTOMATIC SPOOLING PRIORITY SYSTEM - II. What you see in the text below is a narrative description, not the program name.
FWIW, a lot of people get product names wrong, e.g., HASP 4 when what they are referring to is HASP II Version 4. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
No, what I see is a scan of a single, very old document that contains a contradiction between the name in the heading and the name in the narrative description (just because it appears in the text doesn't make it any less "a name"). As you pointed out, the name listed in the catalog could be a mistake. It could just as easily have been a poor editing job. Just because something came from Itty Bitty doesn't mean it was error-free. I remember having to fix a few source-level PTFs for PRPQ systems because the code, as written, clobbered the parm pointer in R1 before saving it, or something else just as stupid.
I don't agree that the description in the narrative description is a name, nor did I suggest that the title could be in error. As to being old, that's appropriate for documenting the name of an old program. I'm a bit puzzled by the complaint, since later you complain about SA22-7535-06 being too new.
As for poor editing, all of the HASP manuals I've had agreed with the catalog of Programs as to the title and number. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I think the z/OS manual is too new for history research.
You can't have it both ways. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Back in the day, the IBM NC and IBM SW regions even had nomenclature differences between them. I would, if possible, like to find some sources to answer the question with some measure of certainty. If you would rather whack me in the head, fine, but it's a legitimate question and I'd like a reliable answer if one can be found.
The Catalog of Programs is a reliable source for program names. You might ask one of the Computer museums whether they still have copies of the 360D-05.1.007 or 360D-05.1.014. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Heck, IBM may have changed the definition over time and, if it did, I'd love to know why. Stranger things have happened.
And, FWiW, I never knew a competent sysprog who didn't understand the numbering differences between versions of HASP/JES2, MFT/MVT, SVS/MVS, MVS/SP-XA-ESA (and all its other flavors), etc. — UncleBubba T @ C ) 23:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Alas, most of the sysprogs that I've met have gotten nomenclature and numbering wrong somewhere along the line. Many have also told me that things I'd been doing for decades couldn't be done :-( Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)



IBM Houston Automated Spooling ProgramHouston Automatic Spooling Priority — Incorrect name.

Per IBM. "What is a JES?". z/OS V1R9.0 JES2 Introduction. IBM. SA22-7535-06. JES2 is descended from HASP (Houston automatic spooling priority)  Unknown parameter |separator= ignored (help)

See also IBM (January 1971). Catalog of Programs for IBM System/ 360 Models 25 and above (January 1971) (PDF). pp. 195, 197. GC20-1619-8.  Unknown parameter |separator= ignored (help) Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Disputed claims[edit]

RJE[edit]

Even under OS/360, Houston Automatic Spooling Priority System, 360D-05.1.007 and Houston Automatic Spooling Priority System - II, 360D-05.1.014 had code to allow remote submission of jobs and retrieval of job output at remte workstations. Even the more sophisticated Multileaving support became available well before MVS, or even SVS, was on the scene. The transition from HASP II Version 4 to JES2 did not change the remote batch facilities, nor was that the point at which Network Job Entry (NJE) was added.

I've made the correction. I can add more detail if it's not TMI.Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

HASP emulators[edit]

There was no such product, although some vendors may have used the term. What was marketed were workstation programs, either simulating the IBM 2770, IBM 2780 or IBM 3780, or implimenting the multileaving protocol. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 21:56, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I've made the correction. I can add more detail if it's not TMI.Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Missing history[edit]

After the first few lines, most of the article discusses HASP II V3 and later. I can add information on HASP II Version 3 and HASP II Version 4, but I don't have experience with the original version. If someone has the background I believe that adding some of the intervening history would be appropriate. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Some updates[edit]

I did some updating of this article, provided some background on how OS/360 operated without HASP. I hope I got it right, I hesitate to say more - I assume each reader/writer required its own partition/region, but couldn't find a cite. How many tasks could OS/360 support? I think you'd also run out of available tasks. I also added a bit on RJE. I think multi-leaving was one of the major wonders of HASP. I'd like to add some description on how it works and how it's different from standard BISYNC, but I can't find a source just now. It would be nice if someone had thruput comparisons. How about a scan of as HASP banner page? Peter Flass (talk) 18:57, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I did some minor editing. I replaced the description of RJE with a footnote and removed the reference to TCAM, which RJE did not use.
Yes, each R/I, Initiator and Writer ran in its own partition/region, except that CRJE and RJE called the R/I as a subroutine and had their own writer code.
The number of tasks is sticky. PCP supported only 1, and could not run HASP. The original MFT only supported a small number of partitions, but MFT II could support 51 and had subtasking as well. MVT could support as many regions as you had memory or, although only 15 of them could be Initiators. As with MFT II, a task could ATTACH subtasks within the same region.
BSC (Binary Synchronous Communications) is a link level protocol and doesn't define application data streams. At the application level the 2770, 2780 and 3780 terminals were very similar, but the workstation protocols fore HASP and RJE were very different from those of the terminals and from each other.
If you can find somebody in the DC metropolitan area willing to scan some of my dead trees I will contribute the PDF's to bitsavers so that they can be linked to from the article. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:46, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarifications. My memory is fading somewhat and the details are hard to dig out at this date. I do remember that MRJE had at least one major advantage:
  • Instead of ACKing a block of data HASP would combine the ACK with a block of data going in the other direction if there was one, and cut down the line turnaround overhead.
  • Could dumb RJE devices like the 2780 handle multiple streams at the same time or could it either transmit cards or print a report but not both at once?Peter Flass (talk) 18:13, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
The 2770, 2780 and 3780 did not support any sort of interleaving; a transmission block contained either card data or print data, but not both.
You are correct about Multileaving allowing a data block in lieu of an ACK. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

pages parameter of {{cite}} in update by W163[edit]

W163 changed several {{cite}} templates to sppecify pages= with what appears to be the page count. The documentation of {{cite manual}} states that pages= should specify a range of page numbers, not a page count. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:58, 19 August 2012 (UTC)