RE: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
> This also is an anecdote from some time back. As we were > signing a fairly significant software contract with a large > organization their manager told us "You guys know nothing > about marketing. Your presentation was unprofessional, no > glossy brochures, no audio visuals and we would not have > bought except that you were the only ones who convinced us > you could do the job". We just smiled and watched the ink > dry while we pondered "where did we go right?". > > The simple truth is that if you hype a product and sell it > into an area where it is inadequate your triumph is short > lived and the scorn and litigation enduring. On the other > hand if you deliver a solution which works as well, or > preferably better, than proposed you have generated raving > fans who will buy again and endorse your product to all and > sundry. Which is the better model? I agree that if its an inadaquate product, the deep stuff you get into is well deserved (but you clearly connected with someone who did understand the technical value so it isnt entirely hopeless a situation). I do not see a choice here - you need great technology and you need just the right marketing to maximize your own return and push out the limits of what your company can achieve. Convince both management and engineering. They both need to be on the same page or else, and I think that is achievable. Engineers making all decisions may sound like its sensible but its asking for a different type of trouble. Years ago I was involved with a large corporation that dominated a particular market space (about 10 million seats circa 1996). An engineer solved a problem by using a third party control that he didn't run by corporate before incorporating into the product. That engineer did not understand that all portions of the product had to meet specific criteria in European and Asian markets - that control was totally incompatible, and the source wasn't available at any price (this was fairly well spelled out in the EULA after the problem surfaced). The discovery wasn't made until after North American launch, and late in process when European and Asian launches were developed. The re-engineering costs and unexpected delays in those markets had a severe financial impact. Yes, this is just one instance - but just one of many. I think the availability of inexpensive overseas development is a wake up call to engineers in North America and Western Europe that they have to move to engage management (ie be a part of management). On the other hand, management that jumps into outsourcing without a good understanding of architectural goals and architectural management learn to regret it. Best regards, Lynn Fredricks President Paradigma Software http://www.paradigmasoft.com Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
RE: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
> My intent is to provide complete detailed technical > information about SQLite, including its limitations and > faults, and honest comparisons and even recommendations of > other products (including, but not limited to DeviceSQL). My > intent is to avoid sophistry, misrepresentation, > exaggeration, and hype. > This intent is sometimes imperfectly executed, but it is my goal. > > If that means that SQLite is uncompetitive, then so be it. I wasn't criticizing what you did, only stating that sales people often target decision makers who are not engineers and its an inevitability in commercial software sales. I think SQLite falls out of the norm anyway - there are plenty of commercial products that incorporate the public domain source code and leverage public knowledge of SQLite that are totally outside of your control or influence. With many products, who knows what's been changed anyway? You cant be responsible for that :-) Best regards, Lynn Fredricks President Paradigma Software http://www.paradigmasoft.com Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
This also is an anecdote from some time back. As we were signing a fairly significant software contract with a large organization their manager told us "You guys know nothing about marketing. Your presentation was unprofessional, no glossy brochures, no audio visuals and we would not have bought except that you were the only ones who convinced us you could do the job". We just smiled and watched the ink dry while we pondered "where did we go right?". The simple truth is that if you hype a product and sell it into an area where it is inadequate your triumph is short lived and the scorn and litigation enduring. On the other hand if you deliver a solution which works as well, or preferably better, than proposed you have generated raving fans who will buy again and endorse your product to all and sundry. Which is the better model? Fred Williams wrote: This discussion reminds me of another long, long ago in a galaxy far, far away. (When I worked on "Mainframes" with 32 K or less "core" memory.) Discussing the then lopsided world with my non-IBM salesman, in a local watering hole, after a particularly trying day of dealing with "management." The topic was the state of the computer industry at that time. (And yet today.) I was complaining of managements' complete lack of ability to see the superior to IBM technology, (IMHO) and cost effectiveness we had installed. That is when I learned of the non bits and bytes "real world." My late salesman friend said, "Fred, don't you understand that the computer industry is a Marketing industry based on technology, and not a technology industry?" Thirty years later nothing could be truer. No matter how much things change, they still stay the same... Fred Running Windoze on a "PC". I know, I know it should be Linux on a Mac. But I live in the "real world" today. I rest my case. -Original Message- From: D. Richard Hipp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 7:04 AM To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org Subject: Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL? On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:24 PM, Lynn Fredricks wrote: That's true. A lot of those kinds of sales presentations are correctly targeted at decision makers that make financial decisions. I don't consider it a bad thing - it's really a necessity to be competitive. My intent is to provide complete detailed technical information about SQLite, including its limitations and faults, and honest comparisons and even recommendations of other products (including, but not limited to DeviceSQL). My intent is to avoid sophistry, misrepresentation, exaggeration, and hype. This intent is sometimes imperfectly executed, but it is my goal. If that means that SQLite is uncompetitive, then so be it. D. Richard Hipp [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- --- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- --- - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:24 PM, Lynn Fredricks wrote: That's true. A lot of those kinds of sales presentations are correctly targeted at decision makers that make financial decisions. I don't consider it a bad thing - it's really a necessity to be competitive. The bear in the woods isnt evil, he's just hungry like the other bears :-) It is bad for the company you are selling to because the wrong people are making these product decisions within these companies and it is clear that these sales presentations take advantage of that. It is potentially bad for your company if your product is not suitable for their needs and you successfully sell it to them; you may endanger your company's reputation. While you are not responsible for the structure of any company you sell to, you are responsible for your own integrity. Making the claim that you're just doing what everyone else is does not absolve you or your salespeople of this responsibility. Your analogy about bears and competition tells me you and your salespeople might feel justified using tactics that give used car salesmen a bad name. A more appropriate analogy is to say that you would take candy from a child because you can, or that you would you sell a sub-prime mortgage to a borrower you know is not credit-worthy so you can earn a higher commission. If you knowingly convince decision makers who do not have the skills to make such decisions to buy products that are not appropriate to their needs, it is essentially the same thing. I would not trust any company that is afraid to sell to my engineering department. I think what you are seeing is evolution of the software industry. It really isnt necessary for there to be such an extreme split between engineering and management - and by evolution I mean that engineering has to adapt to a tighter relationship with management, or they are destined to have their roles outsourced. Noone should know the product than its own engineers, and its those who can bridge that divide that will be running the engineering and IT departments. It is not the role of management to understand the engineering details or decisions, but to understand the impact that those decisions have in their own role of providing and managing the resources that their engineers and others need so they can build the best products possible at the lowest cost and sell them to their customers. Managers rightfully step in where there are resource issues or constraints, but they have no business making the technical decisions on component selection where the complexity of integration of those components is high and the resource constraints are not at issue. If a company's own engineers do not understand their own products I fail to see how managers can step in and make better engineering decisions. It would be ideal if engineers could explain things in ways that managers could understand, but engineers are usually hired for their engineering skills, not their marketing or sales skills; to then say it is engineering's own fault that they cannot compete against professional salespeople and marketers is disingenuous. There are engineers who can bridge the gap fairly well and maybe they are or will be the ones running the engineering and IT departments, but the implicit assumption that it is management's role to make technical selection decisions still remains and it is that assumption that must be challenged. If it is true that management requires a tighter relationship with engineering in order to be successful, then it is beyond me how outsourcing those engineering roles could lead to that outcome. The best feedback you will get to improve your product will be from the engineers in your customer's companies; the managers can only help you improve your ability to persuade other managers, but improving your sales pitch won't improve your product. It is your engineering department's responsibility to create a relationship with the engineering departments of the companies you sell to; doing this can create potential supporters within the engineering department of your customer's company and an understanding of where and how your product falls short and can be improved. Any manager who overrules their engineers on technical selections is not making wise financial or product decisions and is not doing what is in the best interests of their company. That it happens all the time and that salespeople take advantage of this does not make it ethical or beneficial to anyone, even though it may look beneficial to the seller in the short term. /s. - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
RE: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
This discussion reminds me of another long, long ago in a galaxy far, far away. (When I worked on "Mainframes" with 32 K or less "core" memory.) Discussing the then lopsided world with my non-IBM salesman, in a local watering hole, after a particularly trying day of dealing with "management." The topic was the state of the computer industry at that time. (And yet today.) I was complaining of managements' complete lack of ability to see the superior to IBM technology, (IMHO) and cost effectiveness we had installed. That is when I learned of the non bits and bytes "real world." My late salesman friend said, "Fred, don't you understand that the computer industry is a Marketing industry based on technology, and not a technology industry?" Thirty years later nothing could be truer. No matter how much things change, they still stay the same... Fred Running Windoze on a "PC". I know, I know it should be Linux on a Mac. But I live in the "real world" today. I rest my case. > -Original Message- > From: D. Richard Hipp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 7:04 AM > To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org > Subject: Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of > DeviceSQL? > > > > On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:24 PM, Lynn Fredricks wrote: > > > That's true. A lot of those kinds of sales presentations > are correctly > > targeted at decision makers that make financial decisions. I don't > > consider > > it a bad thing - it's really a necessity to be competitive. > > > > My intent is to provide complete detailed technical information > about SQLite, including its limitations and faults, and honest > comparisons and even recommendations of other products > (including, but not limited to DeviceSQL). My intent is to avoid > sophistry, misrepresentation, exaggeration, and hype. > This intent is sometimes imperfectly executed, but it is my goal. > > If that means that SQLite is uncompetitive, then so be it. > > > D. Richard Hipp > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -- > --- > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- > --- > - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:24 PM, Lynn Fredricks wrote: That's true. A lot of those kinds of sales presentations are correctly targeted at decision makers that make financial decisions. I don't consider it a bad thing - it's really a necessity to be competitive. My intent is to provide complete detailed technical information about SQLite, including its limitations and faults, and honest comparisons and even recommendations of other products (including, but not limited to DeviceSQL). My intent is to avoid sophistry, misrepresentation, exaggeration, and hype. This intent is sometimes imperfectly executed, but it is my goal. If that means that SQLite is uncompetitive, then so be it. D. Richard Hipp [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
RE: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
> This scenario has played out multiple times. > > Say what you want about DeviceSQL the product, but one thing > is undeniable: their sales presentations are top-notch. The > first remark of yours that I quoted above shows this to be the case. Yes - but a company that sells technical products has to also do that, too. > But impressive sales talks do not necessarily translate into > impressive products. In fact, a management-oriented sales > presentation, such as provided by Encirq, can be a put-off > for technical people. The engineers and programmers I > normally deal with are much more attracted to the droll, > just-the-facts type of product that they see and get with > SQLite. Flashly sales talks that are low in technical > detail, such as those offered in the past by Encirq (I > haven't seen the "webinar") tend to frighten many technical people. That's true. A lot of those kinds of sales presentations are correctly targeted at decision makers that make financial decisions. I don't consider it a bad thing - it's really a necessity to be competitive. The bear in the woods isnt evil, he's just hungry like the other bears :-) > When engineers contacted me with help in defending SQLite, it > was not because they didn't understand SQLite. It was > because they recognized that their management did not > understand SQLite, and that they had no hope of communicating > as effectively as the Encirq sales team, and that they were > desparate for any kind of help they could get. Sadly, they > got little help from me since I, like they, am hopelessly > outclassed by the Encirq sales people when it comes to giving > impressive talks. On no occasion have I told the engineers > anything they didn't already know, though I might have helped > them to organize their thoughts a little. I think what you are seeing is evolution of the software industry. It really isnt necessary for there to be such an extreme split between engineering and management - and by evolution I mean that engineering has to adapt to a tighter relationship with management, or they are destined to have their roles outsourced. Noone should know the product than its own engineers, and its those who can bridge that divide that will be running the engineering and IT departments. Best regards, Lynn Fredricks President Paradigma Software http://www.paradigmasoft.com Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
"Lynn Fredricks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't know anything about DeviceSQL but their > presentation is enough to get my respect :-) > [...] > > It seems to me that if the engineers are coming to you to defend their > selection of SQLite, then they didnt know SQLite as well as they should This scenario has played out multiple times. Say what you want about DeviceSQL the product, but one thing is undeniable: their sales presentations are top-notch. The first remark of yours that I quoted above shows this to be the case. But impressive sales talks do not necessarily translate into impressive products. In fact, a management-oriented sales presentation, such as provided by Encirq, can be a put-off for technical people. The engineers and programmers I normally deal with are much more attracted to the droll, just-the-facts type of product that they see and get with SQLite. Flashly sales talks that are low in technical detail, such as those offered in the past by Encirq (I haven't seen the "webinar") tend to frighten many technical people. When engineers contacted me with help in defending SQLite, it was not because they didn't understand SQLite. It was because they recognized that their management did not understand SQLite, and that they had no hope of communicating as effectively as the Encirq sales team, and that they were desparate for any kind of help they could get. Sadly, they got little help from me since I, like they, am hopelessly outclassed by the Encirq sales people when it comes to giving impressive talks. On no occasion have I told the engineers anything they didn't already know, though I might have helped them to organize their thoughts a little. -- D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
RE: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
> > August? We start to discuss about DeviceSQL some days ago, or I am > > wrong? > > > > I have several support customer in Europe who have been > visited by the Encirq sales rep there, trying to get them to > abandon SQLite in favor of DeviceSQL. The way this normally > happens is that a sales talk is given to the management. > Then the management goes to their engineers asking for a > comparison of DeviceSQL and SQLite. The engineers then come > to me for help in defending SQLite. > I respond with a letter outlining the strengths and > weaknesses of each product as known to me. I am always very > careful to outline the limitations of my knowledge in these > cases and to attempt to give as fair and as balanced of a > comparison as I can. > > In one recent episode (prehaps the one that Steve is > referring to) my reply was forwarded to the Encirq sales rep. > This provoked a vigorous response from Encirq in which they > attempted a point-by-point rebuttal of my letter. While Im not in the habit of defending the competition, Id like to toss my 2-cents in on this. I don't know anything about DeviceSQL but their presentation is enough to get my respect :-) The database market is very mature and if you do not have a set of special features (in the actual engineering of the product, deployment or in its licensing) that is compeling to a certain customer segment, you are dead meat. Understanding those compeling reasons is one part engineering and one part management. Engineering should understand technical limitations/advantages and needs to be able to convey them convincingly to management to the best of their understanding of product strategy. Likewise management also makes decisions not always based on engineers understanding or lack of understanding of the direction of the business (let along execs jockeying against each other ;-)). And no matter how you couch or caveat a statement, one isnt always present to know that those caveats are also passed along - you may get little difference out the other end between "God told me..." and "I witnessed it myself." It seems to me that if the engineers are coming to you to defend their selection of SQLite, then they didnt know SQLite as well as they should because - it seems they havent made a very informed choice for using SQLite (or any db) to begin with. The informed one might not be with the company any more. But if a sales guy from DeviceSQL can pinpoint the needs of an organization better than its own engineers, then its even worse (or better if you are the DeviceSQL sales rep!). Are you sure your customer is in Europe and not the US federal government? :-) Best regards, Lynn Fredricks President Paradigma Software http://www.paradigmasoft.com Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
oops, fingers are moving faster than the brain :-) of course, you are right, Dennis. Steve Dennis Cote wrote: > > steveweick wrote: >> the tests were done >> using Windows XP SP2 and Linux FC5 on a 3GHz P4 with 1MB >> > > That must be very slow. ;-) > > I'm sure you meant 1GB for windows XP. > > Dennis Cote > > - > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Improving-performance-of-SQLite.-Anyone-heard-of-DeviceSQL--tp14280006p14325082.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
steveweick wrote: the tests were done using Windows XP SP2 and Linux FC5 on a 3GHz P4 with 1MB That must be very slow. ;-) I'm sure you meant 1GB for windows XP. Dennis Cote - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ion Silvestru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: SW: Richard, We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop the FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest you not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading information. I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL, full of suppositions). Thanks for posting, Ion. I too found Steve's remarks to be rather insolent. But I was just going to let it go. Seeing your response was an encouragement to me since it shows me that I am not the only one who feels that way. Thanks! Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list immediately after sending his inflammatory missive. These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, only marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose various things (just see previous messages). All of us are waiting for what Richard stated: "If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions. Even better would be if you could blog about it." Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL. Any way, thank you. -- D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Methinks he doth protest too much. - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
RE: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
Hi Sam, re your points below: 1. I think I said "innovative", not "revolutionary". The scheme involves using "dirty bits" rather than a log to record the transactional state of a page. 2. We plan on publishing all the details of the benchmarks in a few days. But to answer your question about platforms and tests, the tests were done using Windows XP SP2 and Linux FC5 on a 3GHz P4 with 1MB, Linux 2.4.31-a9-3 on a 200MHz ARM9 with 64MB, and Freescale Embedded Linux 2.6.16.11 on a 466 MHz 5200 with 256MB. The tests were done with relatively simple tables that ranged in size from 5000 to 1M records. Inserts, deletes, updates, and various selects were tested against the SQLite prepare/execute interface and the DeviceSQL compiled and interpreted interfaces. 3. I'm not surprised to hear that SQLite is substantially faster than MSSQL. We haven't tested MSSQL, but it makes sense, because both SQLite and DeviceSQL do not pay the MSSQL price of client server interfaces. That said, the real question comes down whether SQLite will meet your application performance needs. If it does, great. By contrast, DeviceSQL customers have very stringent performance requirements (some even have a "performance budget") and often view performance as a critical element in achieving competitive advantage. If your application doesn't fit that mold, then SQLite is the right choice for you. SQLite performance is poor compared with that of DeviceSQL, not poor in general. Our customers have confirmed that a number of times. 4. I'm not a big fan of DeviceSQL marketing to date either. I think that's going to change soon... watch this space. Best regards, Steve Steve, I found the information you posted to be a good contrast and would love to learn more, but you didn't include any technical details. You said you have atomic commits without a rollback journal and instead use some revolutionary new way of doing commits. You said DeviceSQL performs significantly faster than SQLite, can you show what tests you ran, on what platforms, and your exact results? I was particularly skeptical when you said "SQLite performance, while poor on larger PCs" because in our own testing we've found SQLite to be 4 times faster than MSSQL after we migrated. If you're finding SQLite performance to be poor at all, then most likely your developers are doing something wrong in testing SQLite which of course would invalidate your comparison to DeviceSQL. In short, can you provide more details? Personally I don't install demo software just to learn what I should be able to get from the company website (which I would hope is truly technical details, not just marketing fluff). I tried searching online for information about DeviceSQL but pretty much everything I found was regurgitation of marketing data from your company. The only really compelling thing I found was this. http://www.google.com/trends?q=sqlite%2C+devicesql Best regards, Sam - -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Improving-performance-of-SQLite.-Anyone-heard-of-DeviceSQL--tp14280006p14319009.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
Ion Silvestru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >We wrote Richard back in August to correct his misstatements then. He chose > >to ignore the letter. > > August? We start to discuss about DeviceSQL some days ago, or > I am wrong? > I have several support customer in Europe who have been visited by the Encirq sales rep there, trying to get them to abandon SQLite in favor of DeviceSQL. The way this normally happens is that a sales talk is given to the management. Then the management goes to their engineers asking for a comparison of DeviceSQL and SQLite. The engineers then come to me for help in defending SQLite. I respond with a letter outlining the strengths and weaknesses of each product as known to me. I am always very careful to outline the limitations of my knowledge in these cases and to attempt to give as fair and as balanced of a comparison as I can. In one recent episode (prehaps the one that Steve is referring to) my reply was forwarded to the Encirq sales rep. This provoked a vigorous response from Encirq in which they attempted a point-by-point rebuttal of my letter. Well, maybe it wasn't quite point-by-point. They did attempted to rebut every good thing I said about SQLite and every bad thing I said about DeviceSQL, But they let stand all of the limitations of SQLite that I mentioned, as well as those factors I said were favorable to DeviceSQL. Did I ignore this letter? Yes and no. I did read it. But the overall impression I got from reading it was that the customer can cure cancer and bring about world peace if only they would switch to using DeviceSQL. I tend to discount such information heavily. So, I suppose Steve is correct, in a manner of speaking, in saying that I ignored the letter. -- D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
RE: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
Steve, I found the information you posted to be a good contrast and would love to learn more, but you didn't include any technical details. You said you have atomic commits without a rollback journal and instead use some revolutionary new way of doing commits. You said DeviceSQL performs significantly faster than SQLite, can you show what tests you ran, on what platforms, and your exact results? I was particularly skeptical when you said "SQLite performance, while poor on larger PCs" because in our own testing we've found SQLite to be 4 times faster than MSSQL after we migrated. If you're finding SQLite performance to be poor at all, then most likely your developers are doing something wrong in testing SQLite which of course would invalidate your comparison to DeviceSQL. In short, can you provide more details? Personally I don't install demo software just to learn what I should be able to get from the company website (which I would hope is truly technical details, not just marketing fluff). I tried searching online for information about DeviceSQL but pretty much everything I found was regurgitation of marketing data from your company. The only really compelling thing I found was this. http://www.google.com/trends?q=sqlite%2C+devicesql Best regards, Sam --- We're Hiring! Seeking a passionate developer to join our team building Flex based products. Position is in the Washington D.C. metro area. If interested contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: steveweick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:59 AM To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org Subject: Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL? oops, I guess I need to get used to this message list protocol. First let me apologize for letting Richard get me mad. Most of my friends would describe me as one of the most laid back people they know. Why am I mad you ask? We wrote Richard back in August to correct his misstatements then. He chose to ignore the letter. Moreover he (or anyone) has been able to download our product with all of its documentation since February or March of this year. We encourage people to do so, because using the product is far more convincing and informative than trying to plow through a bunch of marketing blather. By the way, I don't know where Richard got the stuff about me leaving the mailing list... it never happened. Steve - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
steveweick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > D. Richard Hipp wrote: > > > > Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment > > since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list > > immediately after sending his inflammatory missive. > > Hmmm... Further digging prompted by the quoted surprise reply shows Steve's post coming through nabble.com. So Steve didn't unsubscribe, he never subscribed in the first place. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is on the mailing list, not [EMAIL PROTECTED] And apparently Steve is viewing through nabble. Never heard of nabble.com before Good to know. -- D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
oops, I guess I need to get used to this message list protocol. First let me apologize for letting Richard get me mad. Most of my friends would describe me as one of the most laid back people they know. Why am I mad you ask? We wrote Richard back in August to correct his misstatements then. He chose to ignore the letter. Moreover he (or anyone) has been able to download our product with all of its documentation since February or March of this year. We encourage people to do so, because using the product is far more convincing and informative than trying to plow through a bunch of marketing blather. By the way, I don't know where Richard got the stuff about me leaving the mailing list... it never happened. Steve steveweick wrote: > > > > D. Richard Hipp wrote: >> >> Ion Silvestru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >SW: Richard, We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop >>> the >>> >FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I >>> suggest you >>> >not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading >>> >information. >>> >>> I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not >>> only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL, >>> full of suppositions). >>> >> >> Thanks for posting, Ion. I too found Steve's remarks to be >> rather insolent. But I was just going to let it go. Seeing >> your response was an encouragement to me since it shows me >> that I am not the only one who feels that way. Thanks! >> >> Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment >> since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list >> immediately after sending his inflammatory missive. >> >>> >>> These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading >>> information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's >>> hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, >>> only >>> marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence >>> of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose >>> various things (just see previous messages). >>> >>> All of us are waiting for what Richard stated: >>> "If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's >>> products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions. >>> Even better would be if you could blog about it." >>> >>> Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to >>> find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL. >>> >>> Any way, thank you. >>> >> >> -- >> D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> - >> >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Improving-performance-of-SQLite.-Anyone-heard-of-DeviceSQL--tp14280006p14316335.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
D. Richard Hipp wrote: > > Ion Silvestru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >SW: Richard, We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop >> the >> >FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest >> you >> >not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading >> >information. >> >> I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not >> only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL, >> full of suppositions). >> > > Thanks for posting, Ion. I too found Steve's remarks to be > rather insolent. But I was just going to let it go. Seeing > your response was an encouragement to me since it shows me > that I am not the only one who feels that way. Thanks! > > Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment > since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list > immediately after sending his inflammatory missive. > >> >> These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading >> information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's >> hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, >> only >> marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence >> of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose >> various things (just see previous messages). >> >> All of us are waiting for what Richard stated: >> "If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's >> products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions. >> Even better would be if you could blog about it." >> >> Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to >> find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL. >> >> Any way, thank you. >> > > -- > D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > - > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Improving-performance-of-SQLite.-Anyone-heard-of-DeviceSQL--tp14280006p14316330.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
Ion Silvestru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >SW: Richard, We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop the > >FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest you > >not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading > >information. > > I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not > only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL, > full of suppositions). > Thanks for posting, Ion. I too found Steve's remarks to be rather insolent. But I was just going to let it go. Seeing your response was an encouragement to me since it shows me that I am not the only one who feels that way. Thanks! Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list immediately after sending his inflammatory missive. > > These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading > information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's > hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, only > marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence > of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose > various things (just see previous messages). > > All of us are waiting for what Richard stated: > "If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's > products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions. > Even better would be if you could blog about it." > > Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to > find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL. > > Any way, thank you. > -- D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
This is Steve Weick, CTO & VP Engineering at Encirq Corp., developers and IP owners of DeviceSQL. I would like to address D. Richard Hipp’s statements. RDH:"If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions. Even better would be if you could blog about it.Encirq has for years been running Google Adsense ads claiming to be 20x faster than SQLite. (Dunno why they have now reduced that claim to 5x faster.) But I have never yet seen an independent confirmation of this. Nor even have I been able to find anybody who is actually using DeviceSQL in a product. Web searches turn up nothing but marketing literature coming directly or indirectly from Encirq. Some independent analysis (regardless of whether it is favorable or unfavorable to SQLite) would be appreciated." SW: The DeviceSQL performance advantage over SQLite has been demonstrated by running a series of benchmarks with a variety of operations using Linux on PCs, ARM, Freescale, and other processor platforms that are commonly used in embedded applications. In all our benchmarking we attempt to present SQLite capabilities at their best. So we "tweak" SQLite to use indexes, not scans, in all cases. We also opt (for fairness) to compare the products using only paged storage with B-trees like those of SQLite. In many cases our other indexing techniques are far superior to this approach. We provide detailed benchmark reports as well as the benchmark code to prospective customers. We have seen that SQLite performance, while poor on larger PCs, degrades significantly on small processors compared with DeviceSQL. We believe that this is due to the fact that SQLite uses a number of techniques that consume large amounts of the available CPU capacity, and it is therefore unable to operate at the flash or disk speed. While SQLite performance has improved in some areas in the last few releases, we can still show that DeviceSQL is 2-10X faster in all of the interesting cases and 50X faster in one odd case. You do not see client listings on our site because our clients believe that DeviceSQL is part of their competitive advantage and they do not like to advertise to their competition what they are using. You will however see outspoken users of DeviceSQL explain why they chose DeviceSQL over SQLite, if they were not able to make SQLite satisfy their requirements, like Gemstar-TV Guide. RDH: "My understanding of DeviceSQL is: * It is NOT transactional. There is no such thing as ROLLBACK." SW: This is false. DeviceSQL DOES support transactions and ROLLBACK, just not in the traditional, resource intensive manner of maintaining a journaling log. Rather, we use a simple approach which maintains data integrity, high performance, and small footprint without introducing the possibility of corrupting the journal. RDH:"* If you lose power during a write, your database is toast." SW: Again, not true. DeviceSQL has supported transactions and rollback since its very first release in 2003 and continues to do so today. Contrary to Mr. Hipp's assertions, DeviceSQL ensures that writes complete successfully (ensuring no power outage can cause corruption) before continuing after a commit. In fact, because of DeviceSQL's novel (and very simple) commit approach, it is possible to prove that application data is recoverable (this is quite difficult to do with the logging approach used by SQLite and important for devices that must handle critically important data). In addition to fast updates, the DeviceSQL approach yields substantially shorter boot times after failures. This is often important to consumer devices where the end user will not tolerate long boot times. RDH:"* If your database schema changes, you have to recompile your application." SW: This is true. DeviceSQL is targeted for embedded applications where executables change rarely, so schema changes are a big deal, and the clients do not want to make changes to the schema after production begins. We do however, offer migration utilities and approaches for doing this if needed. RDH:"* The database file format changes depending on the schema." SW: Not sure what this statement is about, although all databases have this to some extent. RDH:"* DeviceSQL is not a general-purpose database engine. You compile SQL statements into C code on a development workstation, then compile the C code for your embedded device." SW: Neither is SQLite by this standard. Both products are application-resident database engines that live in the application's address space. The question is whether the main use model is compiled SQL versus interpreted SQL or C APIs. DeviceSQL also supports C query interfaces. This is rarely an issue in small devices where the database manager is embedded in the application, and where our compiled language can be used to implement application database logic. RDH:"I can imagine circumstances where the DeviceSQL approach,
Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?
Robert Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After spending some time trying various methods to optimize the performance > of SQLite for an ARM-based application, I've come across a technology called > DeviceSQL. The developers of DeviceSQL (Encirq) claim it has 5x the > performance of SQLite and they are putting on a webinar on Dec. 13th to go > into details. > > http://seminar2.techonline.com/registration/distrib.cgi?s=1191=1700 > > I like SQLite, but has anyone tried or benchmarked DeviceSQL for an embedded > application? Also, has anyone found a way to integrate a custom indexing > methods into SQLite? > I've been trying to find out more about Encirq and DeviceSQL for years. They have a very agressive marketing organization that plays fast and loose with the facts. But other than this, I haven't been able to learn much. Various web searches turn up nothing that isn't either written directly by Encirq or at least ghost-written by Encirq. I have never seen an independent 3rd-party evaluation of their product. If anybody is really using it, they have choosen not to blog about it. DeviceSQL is very different from SQLite. It is not a general-purpose SQL database engine. From what I understand, you enter SQL on your workstation. DeviceSQL then generates C-code that implements that SQL. Then you compile the C-code on your device. If you database schema changes, you have to regenerate the code and recompile your application. BTW, Encirq used to purchase Google ads claiming that DeviceSQL was 20x faster than SQLite. I don't know why they reduced that claim to 5x. -- D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
