Accounting woes for HCX/UX 3.0

Sat Jan 7 07:37:14 AEST 1989

>From article <1356 at mtunb.ATT.COM>, by jcm at mtunb.ATT.COM (was-John McMillan):
> 
> Those data are REPORTED in 'comp_t' form.  This is NOT a SHORT:
> 	typedef	ushort comp_t;		/* "floating point" */
> 			/* 13-bit fraction, 3-bit exponent  */
> Notice: it is NOT EVEN SIGNED.  (Would you let your sibling marry
> 	a NEGATIVE non-signed value?)
> 
> If you really think the system does this to save FLOATING POINT arithmetic,
> I've a coupla bridges for ya ;-}.  However, if you're interested in
> minimizing the size of accounting records, particularly dating back to
> those halcyon days when a 50 MB disk was often the sole large disk....
> 
Is it possible then, that the report code is not using the correct
data type?  Or is it that the actual accounting records are 
overflowing.  What I'm trying to say is, can I get any useful info
at all from accounting, or is it just a waste of cpu time?

Ok... Like I said, I'm new to unix.  I just graduated with a bs in cs, and
I had heard a lot of hype about unix from fellow computer scientists.  Is
it likely that people developing the new versions will realize that
50 MB sole disks are a thing of the past, and that machines are much
faster and more capable to do things (accounting is an important thing)
in a reasonable fashion?  I can see the hype losing it's flair.  It's
1989.

(* flame retardant pajamas being donned *)

-Cris
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Cris Fuhrman             | manager at a.coe.wvu.wvnet.edu (129.71.12.1)  |
| Comp Sys Manager         | un020312 at wvnvms.bitnet                     |
| G-40B Eng Science Bldg.  | "Just say NO to commercial file x-fers."   |
| WVU Morgantown, WV       |              - Kermit the Frog             |