OK - that was probably the wrong thing to call it. Given - it is a ground up rewrite …
Ground up rewrites have new issues and new performance characteristics. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html So — anybody’s past performance experience is pretty irrelevant. — therefore we are sort of at a 1.0 scenario. So 1.0 or “new” or 9 or ??? somebody wants to call it … in some ways we are all starting over. And in other ways - we are just going from 8.1 to 9.0 — which for the most part applies to the ITSM application — not the engine. *What has happened is BMC has blended the applications and the engine as one version number.* *(IMHO - to get rid of the concept of using ARS as a dev engine …. which IMHO - is what people liked about ARS all along)* *Because - apps are easier to sell and more profitable than engines (temporarily). (See SNOW)* But - that versioning and blending is false IMHO. It should not be called v9 instead it should be: 9.0/1.1 or maybe 9011 Who knows … I was just saying that our past performance experience has little to do with future experience, we are effectively at a 1.0 in terms of understanding performance and as a result CAUTION is wise. You are wise to consider that your existing hardware and OS environment is not necessarily the right fit for your new environment. With that bit of caution - you will be well served. Go blind around the corner ??? — well — go for it. To simplify: I see this whole transition something like this… ARS went from a diesel engine to a rotary engine… Everybody still knows how to drive the car (applications are the same). It just takes different skills/understanding to work on the engine. There should not be fear, lots of people know how to work with rotary engines, and there are tons of tools for it … it just is the case that the current skilled people with the diesel engine … need to “rethink/retrain” a bit — and then they will be caught up. Now the next question … should we do something about this Pacer? -John On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Chris Hughes <chris_hug...@bmc.com> wrote: > > This release is really a 1.0 release (although called v9), > ... > > Regardless, this is a first release of a complete ground up rewrite - so > CAUTION is the proper approach > > > Hi John - > > It is is not the case that AR 9 is the first release of the AR Java > Sever. The AR Java server was originally released to a limited customer > base well over a year ago. These customers have been running the stack in > production for most of this past year as well. The 9.0 release builds on > the experience of those initial customers. > > Regards, > > Chris > > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years" > -- *John Sundberg* Kinetic Data, Inc. "Your business. Your process." 651-556-0930 I john.sundb...@kineticdata.com www.kineticdata.com I community.kineticdata.com _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
