[U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
I had started to write a perl / uv integration modules for use with perl (but could be anything else - php, ... ) whereas you could OPEN files and READ / WRITE records and manipulate dynamic arrays. Basically, I had a UV phantom (or not phantom - take your pick), which was linked to a perl listener program via FIFOs/Seqential READ/WRITEs The perl (or whatever) programs would negotiate commands via the port, which then the perl listener would pass off to the UV program. It was originally designed so a website that was not local (but had perl ability for a .cgi), could OPEN and READ/WRITE data to a UV Server. If I needed to lock a record (READU), that wasn't a problem, but I needed to come up with a time frame to allow that record to be locked for, I initially chose 15 minutes (after which the UV program would release the lock). Given the issues of web traffic, where one might pull a record, then close a browser, which unless you have some sort of AJAX routine in the webpage which can alert the server that browser is no longer open (maybe hitting an API every 5 seconds - once you go 30 seconds without the API being registered - the server can consider the browser page to be closed?) So what is the thought on how long should one keep a record lock? This doesn't have anything to do with physical programs that run from telnet or so, where the system once it senses it's disconnect would release all locks - which is not so easy to do with a web connection, and one that is connected via port commands (essentially an API in itself). George Gallen Senior Programmer/Analyst Accounting/Data Division, EDI Administrator ggal...@wyanokegroup.com ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220 The Wyanoke Group http://www.wyanokegroup.com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Interesting Article
It would of interest to learn from Rocket about plans (or no plans) for cloud (hosted) U2. --Bill ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
It would depend on what the application was on the web server. I'd think about the security issues a bank has and how long it was before their sessions timeout and require you to re-login. Then you have the consideration of how long a user might take to complete a transaction, such as dating sites profile entry. Nothing worse than getting just the right profile descriptions, hitting NEXT and finding out I didn't type fast enough for saving the page. (Just guessing about that one. Honest!) If you can break up the entry (or whatever the action) into multiple stages, the time would obviously be able to be shorter. As to what the exact amount of time would be, I'd find someone who hasn't seen your process, time them, then probably double, or even triple, the time they need to complete the task. Just some thoughts that come to mind. BobW -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of George Gallen Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 5:59 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion) I had started to write a perl / uv integration modules for use with perl (but could be anything else - php, ... ) whereas you could OPEN files and READ / WRITE records and manipulate dynamic arrays. Basically, I had a UV phantom (or not phantom - take your pick), which was linked to a perl listener program via FIFOs/Seqential READ/WRITEs The perl (or whatever) programs would negotiate commands via the port, which then the perl listener would pass off to the UV program. It was originally designed so a website that was not local (but had perl ability for a .cgi), could OPEN and READ/WRITE data to a UV Server. If I needed to lock a record (READU), that wasn't a problem, but I needed to come up with a time frame to allow that record to be locked for, I initially chose 15 minutes (after which the UV program would release the lock). Given the issues of web traffic, where one might pull a record, then close a browser, which unless you have some sort of AJAX routine in the webpage which can alert the server that browser is no longer open (maybe hitting an API every 5 seconds - once you go 30 seconds without the API being registered - the server can consider the browser page to be closed?) So what is the thought on how long should one keep a record lock? This doesn't have anything to do with physical programs that run from telnet or so, where the system once it senses it's disconnect would release all locks - which is not so easy to do with a web connection, and one that is connected via port commands (essentially an API in itself). George Gallen Senior Programmer/Analyst Accounting/Data Division, EDI Administrator ggal...@wyanokegroup.com ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220 The Wyanoke Group http://www.wyanokegroup.com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1516/3761 - Release Date: 07/12/11 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Interesting Article
I have come to like U2 over the past few years but an honest question: Why would anyone ever pick U2 beyond familiarity and personal preference? Can anyone think of any situation that another (and in a lot of cases a *far* cheaper) database isn't a better fit? Maybe if U2 had it's own niche like MySQL has with web hosting, there would be a market Rocket could focus on ? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Interesting Article
You may have answered your own question. Why do YOU like it? It is easy to develop, quick to code, fairly robust query language, and a lot cheaper than the BIG databases (Oracle, DB2, etc). John Israel Senior Programmer/Analyst Dayton Superior Corporation 1125 Byers Road Miamisburg, OH 45342 -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:26 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I have come to like U2 over the past few years but an honest question: Why would anyone ever pick U2 beyond familiarity and personal preference? Can anyone think of any situation that another (and in a lot of cases a *far* cheaper) database isn't a better fit? Maybe if U2 had it's own niche like MySQL has with web hosting, there would be a market Rocket could focus on ? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Interesting Article
I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Israel, John R. Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 9:31 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article You may have answered your own question. Why do YOU like it? It is easy to develop, quick to code, fairly robust query language, and a lot cheaper than the BIG databases (Oracle, DB2, etc). John Israel Senior Programmer/Analyst Dayton Superior Corporation 1125 Byers Road Miamisburg, OH 45342 -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:26 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I have come to like U2 over the past few years but an honest question: Why would anyone ever pick U2 beyond familiarity and personal preference? Can anyone think of any situation that another (and in a lot of cases a *far* cheaper) database isn't a better fit? Maybe if U2 had it's own niche like MySQL has with web hosting, there would be a market Rocket could focus on ? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
It scales well. I benchmarked 20K concurrent users for a wholesale distribution application on a single (HP Superdome) server and that was 10 years ago. The database structure can be painlessly modified which makes it much easier for new applications development. Need a new field, slap it on the end of the table and go on with your day, try that with your favorite relational environment. Not so important today as it once was when disk was more expensive,but it uses significantly less disk space than a relational database storing the equivalent data. This also contributes to needing significantly less overall computing power to support X number of users for a given application due to more efficient IO, i.e. less disk reads required. You can use SQL, but you don't have to. This, above all, is the MY most significant reason to use U2. Holt, Jake wrote: I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Israel, John R. Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 9:31 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article You may have answered your own question. Why do YOU like it? It is easy to develop, quick to code, fairly robust query language, and a lot cheaper than the BIG databases (Oracle, DB2, etc). John Israel Senior Programmer/Analyst Dayton Superior Corporation 1125 Byers Road Miamisburg, OH 45342 -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:26 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I have come to like U2 over the past few years but an honest question: Why would anyone ever pick U2 beyond familiarity and personal preference? Can anyone think of any situation that another (and in a lot of cases a *far* cheaper) database isn't a better fit? Maybe if U2 had it's own niche like MySQL has with web hosting, there would be a market Rocket could focus on ? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- Jeff Schasny - Denver, Co, USA jschasny at gmail dot com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Interesting article
I respectfully disagree - through the years the few times I've been royally screwed, it's always by a closed-source vendor. I have never made a major commitment to an open-source tool and been burned. Debian, Eclipse, Tomcat, Apache and Postgres have been good to me for a long time. Not saying that open-source lasts forever, but when something does get orphaned, I have more options. http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2009/10/open-source-makes-big-gains-at-the-london-stock-exchange/index.htm I think the LSE found a way to justify open-source to their board and regulators... -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Jordan Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 7:22 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting article Hi Rob Open source has its advantages, but there is the reverse side. I need to know that it has ongoing support if I commit a package on it, I have seen too many people get into trouble when an open source application is no longer supported. Organisations have not been able to apply security patches because their free application cannot support the security patch. There is also the question of security, is open source easier to hack, is it easier to put in back doors. My clients want to know what happens if I get hit by the proverbial bus, I need to justify continuity to them and the open source environment does not provide that continuity. I am not going to be able to put an application into the London Stock exchange based on open source, they could not justify to their board, risk managers and regulators. The cost of supporting open source is sometimes greater than paid for applications. The question to ensure, does U2 provide a value add to my development. Regards David Jordan -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers Sent: Wednesday, 13 July 2011 11:41 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting article David, You're correct that U2 users need to be vocal about what they want, but Rocket has to be proactive, too. Surely they have a few analysts on staff that can read Techmeme or attend a few conferences and see for themselves where developers are headed. It's probably not wise to only listen to *current *U2 users anyway. I started to make a list in my head of what I'd ask Rocket for, but then I stopped because everything I'd ask for I can get* *elsewhere...for free...right now. If I were starting a brand new project today, I'd be hard pressed to find a single reason to pick a U2 database over a free, open-source alternative like MongoDB, PostgreSQL, or MySQL which have drivers for almost every language, heaps of documentation and troubleshooting resources online, fast release cycles, and great (free) developer tools. Can anyone else think of one? -Rob The biggest thing for me is accessibility from other languages, because the On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:02 PM, David Jordan da...@dacono.com.au wrote: Rob your comments are not wrong. However U2 management want to go where they think the market is. As users we don't tell them anything and then complain that they are not mind readers and are not heading in the direction we want to go. As a user group, we give users a voice to be able to set direction. Of course there are a million one views about the future, but we can build a business case based on the wishes of the majority. I have sat down with Rocket and explained how Microsoft Azure could provide a market opportunity and how U2 could work in this environment and I am working with them to look at its feasibility. Others are looking at REST and a range of other APIs. Rocket is not so much ignoring us rather we as users are not talking to Rocket constructively. What is important is to turn this discussion into something constructive. If Rocket asked you what you want, what would you say. David Jordan VP U2UG ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users - IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, copy or disclose any information contained in the message. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message. ___
Re: [U2] Interesting article
On 13/07/11 16:15, McGowan, Ian wrote: I respectfully disagree - through the years the few times I've been royally screwed, it's always by a closed-source vendor. I have never made a major commitment to an open-source tool and been burned. Debian, Eclipse, Tomcat, Apache and Postgres have been good to me for a long time. Not saying that open-source lasts forever, but when something does get orphaned, I have more options. Add to which, if you're in that boat, so are a lot of other people. If you rely on a piece of Open Source, you need to make sure you've got one or two members of your staff well known to the project (even if they don't do much). Then when you need something done, they can do it. You only need a couple of users who aren't free-loading, and the project is unlikely to die ... Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
Wait, why can't you add a new column to a table in MySQL or SQL Server? Putting aside the RDMS arguments, (*apart from familiarity*) why wouldn't you use something like MongoDB or CouchDB, which are accessible from more programming environments, over U2? They offer the same schema flexibility and disk space benefits you cite with U2 and so much more. MongoDB, for instance, has built-in mechanisms for auto-sharding, replication, REST API, full-text index, and I can go on and on. And it's FREE! :-) I can't speak to performance, but I'd love to benchmark MongoDB versus U2. Maybe I will. I know I sound like a MongoDB fanboy, but I think it's a straight-up U2 killer. I challenge anyone to find an area where U2 beats it. -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jeff Schasny jscha...@gmail.com wrote: It scales well. I benchmarked 20K concurrent users for a wholesale distribution application on a single (HP Superdome) server and that was 10 years ago. The database structure can be painlessly modified which makes it much easier for new applications development. Need a new field, slap it on the end of the table and go on with your day, try that with your favorite relational environment. Not so important today as it once was when disk was more expensive,but it uses significantly less disk space than a relational database storing the equivalent data. This also contributes to needing significantly less overall computing power to support X number of users for a given application due to more efficient IO, i.e. less disk reads required. You can use SQL, but you don't have to. This, above all, is the MY most significant reason to use U2. Holt, Jake wrote: I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.orgu2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org[mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.orgu2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Israel, John R. Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 9:31 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article You may have answered your own question. Why do YOU like it? It is easy to develop, quick to code, fairly robust query language, and a lot cheaper than the BIG databases (Oracle, DB2, etc). John Israel Senior Programmer/Analyst Dayton Superior Corporation 1125 Byers Road Miamisburg, OH 45342 -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.orgu2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org[mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.orgu2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:26 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I have come to like U2 over the past few years but an honest question: Why would anyone ever pick U2 beyond familiarity and personal preference? Can anyone think of any situation that another (and in a lot of cases a *far* cheaper) database isn't a better fit? Maybe if U2 had it's own niche like MySQL has with web hosting, there would be a market Rocket could focus on ? __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- --**--** Jeff Schasny - Denver, Co, USA jschasny at gmail dot com --**--** __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[U2] locking problem
Active Read Waiters: Owner Waiter Device Inode Userno Userno 3014662102470 01101 30146647290 01094 3014662386511051030 30146615667 01088 30146647247 01137 30146647290 01159 30146617609 01143 30146617544 01155 30146646939 01105 30146617124 01157 30146647247 01172 30146653310 01169 30146623865 01052 30146615687 01175 30146647290 01001 3014661568711441107 3014661754011441092 3014665331211441120 3014665337211441181 3014661568711441025 3014662229711441189 on universe 10.3.1 and aix 5.2 I am getting a locked owned by userno 0, and causing a lot of locking issues. Anyone know what this might be or how to fix this? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?
In the old days (when men were men) there were computer scientists and engineers who would analyze technologies and make design decisions... sometimes choosing one technology over another. In those days, computers were a lot slower. MulitValue always had tremendous speed advantages and was chosen by experts who were designing things like MRP (Material Requirements Planning) systems that had to handle a lot of complex data or say do complex calculations. These days, a lot of talented computer scientists and engineers realize that MultiValue still has a lot to offer. Design decisions for MultiValue now seems to have more to do with total costs. When comparing U2 to Oracle or Microsoft SQL, U2 wins. When comparing U2 to MySQL, U2 still wins. Microsoft's Azure SQL is something of a new animal with a new costing model. Will U2 win? --Bill -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:44 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?
When comparing U2 to Oracle or Microsoft SQL, U2 wins. When comparing U2 to MySQL, U2 still wins. That's a pretty blanket statement with no supporting reasoning. -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Bill Brutzman bi...@hkmetalcraft.comwrote: In the old days (when men were men) there were computer scientists and engineers who would analyze technologies and make design decisions... sometimes choosing one technology over another. In those days, computers were a lot slower. MulitValue always had tremendous speed advantages and was chosen by experts who were designing things like MRP (Material Requirements Planning) systems that had to handle a lot of complex data or say do complex calculations. These days, a lot of talented computer scientists and engineers realize that MultiValue still has a lot to offer. Design decisions for MultiValue now seems to have more to do with total costs. When comparing U2 to Oracle or Microsoft SQL, U2 wins. When comparing U2 to MySQL, U2 still wins. Microsoft's Azure SQL is something of a new animal with a new costing model. Will U2 win? --Bill -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:44 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
Based on your description, you are using a pessimistic locking approach (similar to a telnet user) for a web application, so choosing a timeout would be arbitrary. Your heartbeat idea could be tied in to avoid having to manually release records. It seems like a bad idea to force a connectionless, stateless web browser to act like a connected, stateful telnet session. Why not switch to an optimistic locking approach? Checksum the original data (record) when it is passed to the browser. When returned from the browser, lock the record and checksum it again. If the checksums match proceed with the write; otherwise, send a message back to the browser allowing the user to cancel or resubmit their changes. This way, record locks should only last a few milliseconds. rex ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Interesting article
Not that I'm promoting or selling anything either way... I stumbled upon this just recently. I've spent all of an hour tooling around with it. This may or may not satisfy your yearning for a distributed cloud based MV environment http://devwiki.neosys.com/index.php/Main_Page On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Tony Gravagno 3xk547...@sneakemail.comwrote: From: Bill Haskett I wonder if this implies that those who U2 are all database gurus? :-) I get the humor but... I need to create a distributed cloud-based MV environment, obviously smaller than Facebook but using the same concept of shards for distributed storage and computing. So far most of the Pick people I talk to have no idea what I'm talking about let alone how to implement it with MV. We're not gurus if we don't speak the same language as the rest of the world. As to old SQL, there is a revolution going on out there and I'm wondering if other MV people have seen this: Look at the data storage for Android, Google App Engine, AmazonDB, etc. All of these platforms and others are using name/value pairs with some relational functionality, but they're not using SQL. Once again we're missing a whole new generation of data hungry applications. While there are still new methods of data storage and retrieval being created all the time, the MV market needs to define a consistent web service / REST API for data access and rule execution, accessible from any client. (That's easy, I have done this many times for various projects and for most MV platforms.) From there, professionals in this community can position as experts to provide applications, DBMS support services, rules in BASIC, hosting, and mentoring for a new generation of people who might like to use BASIC for rules rather than Java, Ruby, Go, or whatever else they're just starting to learn. Yeah... as if... Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute! http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno From:Symeon Breen Some on here will be interested in this. I esp like Gigaom's quote old SQL (as he calls it) is good for nothing and needs to be sent to the home for retired software. After all, he explained, SQL was created decades ago before the web, mobile devices and sensors forever changed how and how often databases are accessed. http://www.eweekeurope.co.uk/news/facebook-needs-major-rewrite-w arns-database-guru-33864 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- John Thompson ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
-Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rex Gozar Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1:08 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion) Why not switch to an optimistic locking approach? Checksum the original data (record) when it is passed to the browser. When returned from the browser, lock the record and checksum it again. If the checksums match proceed with the write; otherwise, send a message back to the browser allowing the user to cancel or resubmit their changes. This way, record locks should only last a few milliseconds. I was thinking along similar lines as well as an option, instead of the checksum token method, I was going to write the record to a holding file with an ID that was a combination of file/record/transaction token And do a comparison using the saved item to see if record changed, but only if the record lock had expired - I still wanted to keep the locks since the system could be used by local users as well, which is easier using the READU locally to test for locking. rex ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?
I'm a fan of U2 - MV in general even. But in this case I have to agree with Rob: We really need to quantify what it means to win otherwise the words do little more than tickle an emotional response. Having had some time with several MV systems as well as several SQL systems, there are areas of each that in a head-to-head comparison, one would win over the other based on price, performance, flexibility, scalability, and reliability. And it's not always U2/MV and it's not always SQL. For getting right to work without extensive tuning, I'd say U2 holds the upper hand. In terms of indexing and application of multiple indexes to queries, I'd put PostgreSQL over MySQL and both over U2. For clustering, Oracle. For the GUI, SQL Server. For that matter, I'd rank the flexibility of triggers in Unidata over triggers in Universe, and they're both MV. So it's a complex task to assign a winner carte blanche without looking deeply into the eyes of specific areas of the products and their applicability to specific problems to be solved. My personal opinion is that there are benefits to all of it. So in that way picking a winner really doesn't do much more than polarize. I know if I were creating an application from scratch today, the criteria I might use to make the decision would be different from anyone else making the same decision even if it were the same application. There is better and there is worse but all of it must be considered in the larger context of the problem to be solved to mean anything at all. -K ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?
Let's focus on costs for a moment. While of course MySQL is widely available... businesses that are seriously using MySQL generally buy maintenance for the year. While I suppose that, pricewise, MySQL support rather reasonable, it is also not free... and I suppose is approx. the same price as U2 maintenance. There other support costs to consider. A lot of shops have say a programmer and a DBA. When these shops find that there are comparable companies doing U2 who have one guy who is both the programmer and the DBA... they wonder... That then is (some of) the supporting reasoning. --Bill -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1:06 PM Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ? When comparing U2 to Oracle or Microsoft SQL, U2 wins. When comparing U2 to MySQL, U2 still wins. That's a pretty blanket statement with no supporting reasoning. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
I am a bit of a mongo DB fanboy myself, I think regarding performance, because of its autosharding any large scale application will definitely beat u2. Mongo db powers many mainstream enterprise solutions, and high profile websites, - bit.ly comes to mind, so it certainly has a pedigree as well. However i am also a u2 fanboy for many many reasons. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers Sent: 13 July 2011 16:52 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article Wait, why can't you add a new column to a table in MySQL or SQL Server? Putting aside the RDMS arguments, (*apart from familiarity*) why wouldn't you use something like MongoDB or CouchDB, which are accessible from more programming environments, over U2? They offer the same schema flexibility and disk space benefits you cite with U2 and so much more. MongoDB, for instance, has built-in mechanisms for auto-sharding, replication, REST API, full-text index, and I can go on and on. And it's FREE! :-) I can't speak to performance, but I'd love to benchmark MongoDB versus U2. Maybe I will. I know I sound like a MongoDB fanboy, but I think it's a straight-up U2 killer. I challenge anyone to find an area where U2 beats it. -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jeff Schasny jscha...@gmail.com wrote: It scales well. I benchmarked 20K concurrent users for a wholesale distribution application on a single (HP Superdome) server and that was 10 years ago. The database structure can be painlessly modified which makes it much easier for new applications development. Need a new field, slap it on the end of the table and go on with your day, try that with your favorite relational environment. Not so important today as it once was when disk was more expensive,but it uses significantly less disk space than a relational database storing the equivalent data. This also contributes to needing significantly less overall computing power to support X number of users for a given application due to more efficient IO, i.e. less disk reads required. You can use SQL, but you don't have to. This, above all, is the MY most significant reason to use U2. Holt, Jake wrote: I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.orgu2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.orgu2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org ] On Behalf Of Israel, John R. Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 9:31 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article You may have answered your own question. Why do YOU like it? It is easy to develop, quick to code, fairly robust query language, and a lot cheaper than the BIG databases (Oracle, DB2, etc). John Israel Senior Programmer/Analyst Dayton Superior Corporation 1125 Byers Road Miamisburg, OH 45342 -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.orgu2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.orgu2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org ] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:26 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I have come to like U2 over the past few years but an honest question: Why would anyone ever pick U2 beyond familiarity and personal preference? Can anyone think of any situation that another (and in a lot of cases a *far* cheaper) database isn't a better fit? Maybe if U2 had it's own niche like MySQL has with web hosting, there would be a market Rocket could focus on ? __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- --**--** Jeff Schasny - Denver, Co, USA jschasny at gmail dot com --**--** __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
Shutterfly also has moved to mongo in production. On Jul 13, 2011 1:56 PM, Symeon Breen syme...@gmail.com wrote: I am a bit of a mongo DB fanboy myself, I think regarding performance, because of its autosharding any large scale application will definitely beat u2. Mongo db powers many mainstream enterprise solutions, and high profile websites, - bit.ly comes to mind, so it certainly has a pedigree as well. However i am also a u2 fanboy for many many reasons. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers Sent: 13 July 2011 16:52 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article Wait, why can't you add a new column to a table in MySQL or SQL Server? Putting aside the RDMS arguments, (*apart from familiarity*) why wouldn't you use something like MongoDB or CouchDB, which are accessible from more programming environments, over U2? They offer the same schema flexibility and disk space benefits you cite with U2 and so much more. MongoDB, for instance, has built-in mechanisms for auto-sharding, replication, REST API, full-text index, and I can go on and on. And it's FREE! :-) I can't speak to performance, but I'd love to benchmark MongoDB versus U2. Maybe I will. I know I sound like a MongoDB fanboy, but I think it's a straight-up U2 killer. I challenge anyone to find an area where U2 beats it. -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jeff Schasny jscha...@gmail.com wrote: It scales well. I benchmarked 20K concurrent users for a wholesale distribution application on a single (HP Superdome) server and that was 10 years ago. The database structure can be painlessly modified which makes it much easier for new applications development. Need a new field, slap it on the end of the table and go on with your day, try that with your favorite relational environment. Not so important today as it once was when disk was more expensive,but it uses significantly less disk space than a relational database storing the equivalent data. This also contributes to needing significantly less overall computing power to support X number of users for a given application due to more efficient IO, i.e. less disk reads required. You can use SQL, but you don't have to. This, above all, is the MY most significant reason to use U2. Holt, Jake wrote: I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org ] On Behalf Of Israel, John R. Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 9:31 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article You may have answered your own question. Why do YOU like it? It is easy to develop, quick to code, fairly robust query language, and a lot cheaper than the BIG databases (Oracle, DB2, etc). John Israel Senior Programmer/Analyst Dayton Superior Corporation 1125 Byers Road Miamisburg, OH 45342 -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org ] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:26 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I have come to like U2 over the past few years but an honest question: Why would anyone ever pick U2 beyond familiarity and personal preference? Can anyone think of any situation that another (and in a lot of cases a *far* cheaper) database isn't a better fit? Maybe if U2 had it's own niche like MySQL has with web hosting, there would be a market Rocket could focus on ? __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-users http://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-users http://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-users http://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- --**--** Jeff Schasny - Denver, Co, USA jschasny at gmail dot com --**--** __**_ U2-Users mailing list
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
Is Mongo a persistent database? That is, does Mongo save the data to disk, or just RAM? If it is RAM, then that is ok for tweets between high school chicks... but not so good for bank accounts. --Bill -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article I am a bit of a mongo DB fanboy myself, I think regarding performance, because of its autosharding any large scale application will definitely beat u2. Mongo db powers many mainstream enterprise solutions, and high profile websites, - bit.ly comes to mind, so it certainly has a pedigree as well. However i am also a u2 fanboy for many many reasons. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
It saves to disk, and iirc you can specify how many replicants it is written to to be considered written. You may be confusing it with memcached or redis, but even they have persistence. On Jul 13, 2011 2:02 PM, Bill Brutzman bi...@hkmetalcraft.com wrote: Is Mongo a persistent database? That is, does Mongo save the data to disk, or just RAM? If it is RAM, then that is ok for tweets between high school chicks... but not so good for bank accounts. --Bill -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article I am a bit of a mongo DB fanboy myself, I think regarding performance, because of its autosharding any large scale application will definitely beat u2. Mongo db powers many mainstream enterprise solutions, and high profile websites, - bit.ly comes to mind, so it certainly has a pedigree as well. However i am also a u2 fanboy for many many reasons. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?
I don't think the flavor of DB is a great indicator of whether you need a dedicated DBA role. Scale of deployment is probably a far better indicator. If we're talking about personnel costs -- have you ever been able to hire a college freshman for $20 bucks an hour who already has 2 years of U2 under his belt from building WordPress sites? The point being that there is much more qualified MySQL and SQL Server talent available than U2 talent. Also, DBs like MySQL are battle tested. You'll rarely find a core bug in MySQL if you're using a stable version. Why? Because hundreds of thousands of developers are using it and thus finding the bugs (likely) before they hit you. When I was working with U2 every day, we consistently found and were affected by core bugs. Costly ones, too. -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Bill Brutzman bi...@hkmetalcraft.comwrote: Let's focus on costs for a moment. While of course MySQL is widely available... businesses that are seriously using MySQL generally buy maintenance for the year. While I suppose that, pricewise, MySQL support rather reasonable, it is also not free... and I suppose is approx. the same price as U2 maintenance. There other support costs to consider. A lot of shops have say a programmer and a DBA. When these shops find that there are comparable companies doing U2 who have one guy who is both the programmer and the DBA... they wonder... That then is (some of) the supporting reasoning. --Bill -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1:06 PM Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ? When comparing U2 to Oracle or Microsoft SQL, U2 wins. When comparing U2 to MySQL, U2 still wins. That's a pretty blanket statement with no supporting reasoning. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
Let's see if I can draw a response from you, Symeon :-)... What exactly makes you a U2 fanboy? What features in U2 are you happy to pay for? -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Symeon Breen syme...@gmail.com wrote: I am a bit of a mongo DB fanboy myself, I think regarding performance, because of its autosharding any large scale application will definitely beat u2. Mongo db powers many mainstream enterprise solutions, and high profile websites, - bit.ly comes to mind, so it certainly has a pedigree as well. However i am also a u2 fanboy for many many reasons. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers Sent: 13 July 2011 16:52 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article Wait, why can't you add a new column to a table in MySQL or SQL Server? Putting aside the RDMS arguments, (*apart from familiarity*) why wouldn't you use something like MongoDB or CouchDB, which are accessible from more programming environments, over U2? They offer the same schema flexibility and disk space benefits you cite with U2 and so much more. MongoDB, for instance, has built-in mechanisms for auto-sharding, replication, REST API, full-text index, and I can go on and on. And it's FREE! :-) I can't speak to performance, but I'd love to benchmark MongoDB versus U2. Maybe I will. I know I sound like a MongoDB fanboy, but I think it's a straight-up U2 killer. I challenge anyone to find an area where U2 beats it. -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jeff Schasny jscha...@gmail.com wrote: It scales well. I benchmarked 20K concurrent users for a wholesale distribution application on a single (HP Superdome) server and that was 10 years ago. The database structure can be painlessly modified which makes it much easier for new applications development. Need a new field, slap it on the end of the table and go on with your day, try that with your favorite relational environment. Not so important today as it once was when disk was more expensive,but it uses significantly less disk space than a relational database storing the equivalent data. This also contributes to needing significantly less overall computing power to support X number of users for a given application due to more efficient IO, i.e. less disk reads required. You can use SQL, but you don't have to. This, above all, is the MY most significant reason to use U2. Holt, Jake wrote: I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org ] On Behalf Of Israel, John R. Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 9:31 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article You may have answered your own question. Why do YOU like it? It is easy to develop, quick to code, fairly robust query language, and a lot cheaper than the BIG databases (Oracle, DB2, etc). John Israel Senior Programmer/Analyst Dayton Superior Corporation 1125 Byers Road Miamisburg, OH 45342 -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org ] On Behalf Of Holt, Jake Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:26 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article I have come to like U2 over the past few years but an honest question: Why would anyone ever pick U2 beyond familiarity and personal preference? Can anyone think of any situation that another (and in a lot of cases a *far* cheaper) database isn't a better fit? Maybe if U2 had it's own niche like MySQL has with web hosting, there would be a market Rocket could focus on ? __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-users http://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-users http://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-users http://listserver.u2u g.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- --**--** Jeff
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
Primarily the mv data structure - is simple yet powerfull (to a point i agree) Databasic feels like you are really in the data when programming, and not divorced via layers and api's - i know you could correlate to stored procedures, but it is not the same. I like the way you open a udt shell and then inside it can do lots of things, or pass things into it. It all follows the normal linux shell ethos. Obviously i use high level (vs2010) tools sets as well, but the ability to go command line, at linux and at u2 is great. Similarly the way the database tables are os files - bit of a plus and minus point for some - but gives you massive flexibility. Being able to write databasic in ED with one eye closed, a beer in one hand, a cat on my knee, holding a conversation with the kids and watching tv - all at the same time - even with Visual Studios being a fantastic ide, and my experience of using .net from the start and java for many years, i still seem to need to concentrate much more on these other languages, and t-sql - well its the manual out every time i venture in there. Many more things as well - these are not really tangible business case things but personal usage things. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers Sent: 13 July 2011 21:12 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article Let's see if I can draw a response from you, Symeon :-)... What exactly makes you a U2 fanboy? What features in U2 are you happy to pay for? -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Symeon Breen syme...@gmail.com wrote: I am a bit of a mongo DB fanboy myself, I think regarding performance, because of its autosharding any large scale application will definitely beat u2. Mongo db powers many mainstream enterprise solutions, and high profile websites, - bit.ly comes to mind, so it certainly has a pedigree as well. However i am also a u2 fanboy for many many reasons. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers Sent: 13 July 2011 16:52 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article Wait, why can't you add a new column to a table in MySQL or SQL Server? Putting aside the RDMS arguments, (*apart from familiarity*) why wouldn't you use something like MongoDB or CouchDB, which are accessible from more programming environments, over U2? They offer the same schema flexibility and disk space benefits you cite with U2 and so much more. MongoDB, for instance, has built-in mechanisms for auto-sharding, replication, REST API, full-text index, and I can go on and on. And it's FREE! :-) I can't speak to performance, but I'd love to benchmark MongoDB versus U2. Maybe I will. I know I sound like a MongoDB fanboy, but I think it's a straight-up U2 killer. I challenge anyone to find an area where U2 beats it. -Rob On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jeff Schasny jscha...@gmail.com wrote: It scales well. I benchmarked 20K concurrent users for a wholesale distribution application on a single (HP Superdome) server and that was 10 years ago. The database structure can be painlessly modified which makes it much easier for new applications development. Need a new field, slap it on the end of the table and go on with your day, try that with your favorite relational environment. Not so important today as it once was when disk was more expensive,but it uses significantly less disk space than a relational database storing the equivalent data. This also contributes to needing significantly less overall computing power to support X number of users for a given application due to more efficient IO, i.e. less disk reads required. You can use SQL, but you don't have to. This, above all, is the MY most significant reason to use U2. Holt, Jake wrote: I'm not sure being cheaper than Oracle can really be touted as an advantage, there aren't many things out there that are more expensive than oracle =D. And all of those things you just mentioned are also true of many FREE databases, so again, why pick U2? -Original Message- From: u2-users-bounces@listserver.**u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-bounces@**listserver.u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org ] On Behalf Of Israel, John R. Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 9:31 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Interesting Article You may have answered your own question. Why do YOU like it? It is easy to develop, quick to code, fairly robust query language, and a lot cheaper than the BIG databases (Oracle, DB2, etc). John Israel Senior Programmer/Analyst Dayton Superior Corporation 1125 Byers Road Miamisburg, OH 45342 -Original Message- From:
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
That sounds feasable, but depending on how your web application is used you might also have to consider the possibility of multiple web users accessing the same record. You might need some unique user id key included in the token that gets carried around by the web session. I think you would have to completely deny access to all but the first web user because you only have stale data to give them at that point. And of course there's always the possibility someone's browser might crash and cause them to lock themselves out of the application for the pre-determined READU period. -John -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of George Gallen Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:28 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion) -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rex Gozar Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1:08 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion) Why not switch to an optimistic locking approach? Checksum the original data (record) when it is passed to the browser. When returned from the browser, lock the record and checksum it again. If the checksums match proceed with the write; otherwise, send a message back to the browser allowing the user to cancel or resubmit their changes. This way, record locks should only last a few milliseconds. I was thinking along similar lines as well as an option, instead of the checksum token method, I was going to write the record to a holding file with an ID that was a combination of file/record/transaction token And do a comparison using the saved item to see if record changed, but only if the record lock had expired - I still wanted to keep the locks since the system could be used by local users as well, which is easier using the READU locally to test for locking. rex ___ ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
We use optimistic locking with a version number in each record (in our case Cache' handles the versioning based on our specification of the files, but either versioning or checksums works). This is a solid approach for web apps instead of using pessimistic locking. --dawn On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Rex Gozar rgo...@gmail.com wrote: Based on your description, you are using a pessimistic locking approach (similar to a telnet user) for a web application, so choosing a timeout would be arbitrary. Your heartbeat idea could be tied in to avoid having to manually release records. It seems like a bad idea to force a connectionless, stateless web browser to act like a connected, stateful telnet session. Why not switch to an optimistic locking approach? Checksum the original data (record) when it is passed to the browser. When returned from the browser, lock the record and checksum it again. If the checksums match proceed with the write; otherwise, send a message back to the browser allowing the user to cancel or resubmit their changes. This way, record locks should only last a few milliseconds. rex ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?
One thing that all the other database lack is that U2 has a sophisticated business rules engine. The SQL bastardise language in other databases is a nightmare compared to unibasic.When everyone is talking APIs, they are mostly talking about the presentation layer. Presentation layer interface to other databases is better than U2, but U2 is better for storing business logic in the database. I am seeing too many applications being developed out their that are breaking the rules of client server where the business logic is in the client. Too many tools use the database as a simple data repository and require business rules to be built into the client. David Jordan ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
After all of these years, why o why haven't the MV DBMS vendors created a READUO mechanism which allows us to optimistically lock records in exactly the way that George, Rex, and a hundred other app developers have indicated over the last 15 years? Design tip: For all new development, abstract your file IO and all OS access into separate functions, Includes, and/or subroutines, away from the business code. This way you can change your datastore interaction without messing with your application logic, and you can re-use the routines for a lot of different work. The application needs to be aware of whether you're moving forward with a pessimistic or optimistic lock, but your app code shouldn't have to manage those mechanisms. T From: George Gallen ... instead of the checksum token method, I was going to write the record to a holding file with an ID that was a combination of file/record/transaction token And do a comparison using the saved item to see if record changed, but only if the record lock had expired - I still wanted to keep the locks since the system could be used by local users as well, which is easier using the READU locally to test for locking. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Interesting article
From: Wol You only need a couple of users who aren't free-loading, and the project is unlikely to die ... I agree with Wol and Ian. Most people just free-load, abuse a generous author, and then abandon the project when the author gets burned out, while blaming the open source model for the failure. There is a concept that most people don't understand about FOSS: the free and open part of FOSS imply both an ability and a responsibility to contribute back to the source. Offer to pay FOSS authors something for their effort. Offer to pay some other developer to improve your free (liberty AND beer) and open source code, and then give your updates back to the author. Heck, just offer some documentation to the project website, or dedicate some time to helping other users, to free up the author's time to write code. One rarely sees software with multiple contributors rotting on the vine. More often it's a single burned out author who chooses time with his family over people who nag for changes and give nothing in return. Yeah, I know that sounds preachy, but someone needs to say it in response to this: From David Jordan: I need to know that it has ongoing support if I commit a package on it, I have seen too many people get into trouble when an open source application is no longer supported. Organisations have not been able to apply security patches because their free application cannot support the security patch. C'mon, all of us here know that software is just text that can be changed by anyone with competent skills. People who get into trouble have obviously not looked at the code or hired someone competent to do so. There's no magic in there, nothing that only one person can figure out. Is the cost of switching to new software (from something 'that' important to you) really less than the cost of fixing something you got for free? T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Interesting article
Tony wrote: ... the MV market needs to define a consistent web service / REST API... Dawn Wolthuis responded: Any clues on how to get any standard that all MV vendors would deploy? I'm thinking this would require third-party software... Glen responded to Dawn: ... there has to be an adopted RFC to define how the comm happens and gives granular detail that can not be misinterpreted by anyone implementing it. Once that is done, it's a matter of building wrappers and interfaces for all of the popular languages. ... More importantly are there more than 3 developers out there willing to suit up and then actually spend time building a language hook? Dawn, we don't need the MV DBMS vendors to provide anything, whether code, consent, approval, or even advocacy. We just need a RFC, created by us the community, which is a spec to define a consistent API. Here is an example of a basic interface which can be implemented in any language: We define a basic connection through a class called mvEnvironment. From an environment we can derive an mvAccount, synonymous with mvDatabase. From a databasee with get a mvFile. And from a file we get a mvItem. In PHP this might look like this, though the same pattern can be applied to Ruby, Java, Go, F#, ObjectiveC, or other common or esoteric languages: $env = new mvEnvironment($connInfo); $db = $env.Login($myAcccountName); $file = $db.FileOpen(CUSTOMER); $rec = $file.Read($ID); $db.Logout(); $name = $rec[NAME]; //... That API is completely DBMS-independent, transport-independent, and language-independent. Based on the $connInfo, the underlying code can use Java, a web service, .NET, C++, along with UniObjects, UOJ, QMClient, MVSP, or any other tools to get into the target system. The underlying connectivity can be coded by anyone who has interest, and a variety of such connectors will allow developers to choose those which are more performant or better suited to specific needs. That's the way the rest of the world works, but someone in this market people keep looking to the MV vendors to not only provide the API but also the supporting implementation. That's completely unnecessary. They can help, and they all do, but we don't need to rely on them for leadership or to create the various language bindings we need. For what it's worth, I already have such a project defined called mvEsperanto, and a PHP binding has been partially coded. I just haven't had the time to publish or maintain it. With so little interest (as Glen attests) even for something that most people can appreciate, it's hard to dedicate time to anything like this - especially without compensation. (Nod to recent comments on FOSS.) T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?
+1 for what David said. Yes, there's the limitation that BASIC is the only native supported language (not factoring external connectors), but as a language native to the environment, this BASIC is really pretty rich by comparison to the stored procedure languages of other DBs. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
Tony, wouldn't READL in Unidata count? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
Kevin: According to the BASIC manual: Description The UniBasic MATREADL command assigns the values found in successive attributes of a record to corresponding elements of a dimensioned array. MATREADL checks for locks and will not read a record locked with an exclusive (U) lock. If the record is available, MATREADL reads and sets a shared (L) lock on it. Note: UniBasic locks are advisory only. They prevent access by other lock-checking commands only. For more information about UniBasic locks, see Developing UniBasic Applications. I think this is different than the optimistic locking Tony was talking about, and another thread was discussing. This is where one reads a record over the web, makes changes, then sends the data back to be updated. During the update, one reads locks the record, compares this record with the originally read record that was sent over the web , and aborts if the original record was changed during this time period. It would be nice if this could be done via a statement in BASIC. We add to this by accepting any changes to data we didn't change on the web side. I think that's what Tony was talking about, but I could be wrong. Bill - Original Message - *From:* precisonl...@gmail.com *To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org *Date:* 7/13/2011 4:35 PM *Subject:* Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion) Tony, wouldn't READL in Unidata count? ___ ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
Ah... thank you for clarifying - and gently at that! ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?
I have to heartily disagree that U2 has a sophisticated business rules engine. U2 Basic is such a limited language. It barely has functions, and you have to home brew almost everything. Microsoft's T-SQL stored procedures are just as horrible to write as U2 Basic programs. As Jeff Atwood put it -- Stored procedures should be considered database assembly language. [1] Why do you think Microsoft now allows you to call CLR code from stored procedures? Because it's so much more efficient to work with the data (i.e., enforce the business rules) in a modern language like C# that has *actual libraries* for doing useful things. I agree that business rules shouldn't be on the client -- but who says they have to be in the database? Look at the ever-so-popular MVC architecture. The models (i.e., the code that works with the database and enforces all of the business rules) are isolated from the views (i.e., the client/presentation code) entirely. -Rob [1]: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2004/10/who-needs-stored-procedures-anyways.html On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Kevin King precisonl...@gmail.com wrote: +1 for what David said. Yes, there's the limitation that BASIC is the only native supported language (not factoring external connectors), but as a language native to the environment, this BASIC is really pretty rich by comparison to the stored procedure languages of other DBs. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article
Always...use the right tool, for the right job...one size doesn't fit all, etc., etc. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Symeon Breen Sent: Thursday, 14 July 2011 3:56 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Why use U2, was Interesting Article I am a bit of a mongo DB fanboy myself, I think regarding performance, because of its autosharding any large scale application will definitely beat u2. Mongo db powers many mainstream enterprise solutions, and high profile websites, - bit.ly comes to mind, so it certainly has a pedigree as well. However i am also a u2 fanboy for many many reasons. ** IMPORTANT MESSAGE * This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please advise the sender by return email, do not use or disclose the contents, and delete the message and any attachments from your system. Unless specifically indicated, this email does not constitute formal advice or commitment by the sender or the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) or its subsidiaries. We can be contacted through our web site: commbank.com.au. If you no longer wish to receive commercial electronic messages from us, please reply to this e-mail by typing Unsubscribe in the subject line. ** ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion)
why haven't the MV DBMS vendors created a READUO Possibly in part because of the need to then have resolution mechanism for when 2 processes change the same data (assuming of course that the data wasn't, say, an accumulation total) -- what interface would you use telnet will not work nicely with the web app described, nor with someone using, say UOJ Still, extend a bit, and it could throw an error with the differences to be handled by whatever application layer -- but of course the real kicker in all of this is, and always has been, the wealth of legacy code that WOULDN'T use the new mechanism without a major rewrite and if you get to THAT point, refer to why U2 thread :-( Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage Better by Design! -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Thursday, 14 July 2011 8:46 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Record Locks - How long should they last for? (Opinion) After all of these years, why o why haven't the MV DBMS vendors created a READUO mechanism which allows us to optimistically lock records in exactly the way that George, Rex, and a hundred other app developers have indicated over the last 15 years? Design tip: For all new development, abstract your file IO and all OS access into separate functions, Includes, and/or subroutines, away from the business code. This way you can change your datastore interaction without messing with your application logic, and you can re-use the routines for a lot of different work. The application needs to be aware of whether you're moving forward with a pessimistic or optimistic lock, but your app code shouldn't have to manage those mechanisms. T From: George Gallen ... instead of the checksum token method, I was going to write the record to a holding file with an ID that was a combination of file/record/transaction token And do a comparison using the saved item to see if record changed, but only if the record lock had expired - I still wanted to keep the locks since the system could be used by local users as well, which is easier using the READU locally to test for locking. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
