subject:"\[U2\] Why Pick U2 \?"

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-11-03 Thread DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com)



Dan,

Did you complete the article regarding ramdisks and U2?

djm


Daniel McGrath wrote:
 
 I've used them in development, but not in Production.
 
 I am just about to post an article that includes usage; I just haven't had
 time to finish proof-reading it.
 
 For windows, check it this question:
 http://superuser.com/questions/34388/whats-the-best-ramdisk-for-windows
 
 Regards,
 Dan
 
 -Original Message-
 
 Is anyone using a RAMDisk with U2 files?
 
 I have noticed that there are two types of ram disks within Linux - tmpfs
 and /dev/ram1 which can be used to create a small file system.
 
 Does anyone have any practical experience on these options?
 
 Is there an effective option for MS-Windows?
 
 Cheers,
 djm
 
 
 
 


-

Learn and Do
Excel and Share


http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com 
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--tp32061959p32775910.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-11-03 Thread Daniel McGrath (Home)


Hi David,

 I wrote this awhile ago:
http://u2tech.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/application-level-caching/

Regards,
Dan


DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com) wrote:
 
 
 Dan,
 
 Did you complete the article regarding ramdisks and U2?
 
 djm
 
 
 Daniel McGrath wrote:
 
 I've used them in development, but not in Production.
 
 I am just about to post an article that includes usage; I just haven't
 had time to finish proof-reading it.
 
 For windows, check it this question:
 http://superuser.com/questions/34388/whats-the-best-ramdisk-for-windows
 
 Regards,
 Dan
 
 -Original Message-
 
 Is anyone using a RAMDisk with U2 files?
 
 I have noticed that there are two types of ram disks within Linux - tmpfs
 and /dev/ram1 which can be used to create a small file system.
 
 Does anyone have any practical experience on these options?
 
 Is there an effective option for MS-Windows?
 
 Cheers,
 djm
 
 
 
 
 
 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--tp32061959p32775912.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-08-26 Thread Wols Lists

On 26/08/11 01:18, George Gallen wrote:
 But swap space isn't really memory, it's disk and nowhere near as fast as 
 memory, and (I don't know for sure) probably
 even far slower than SSD's.
 
 In reality, if your creating a tempfs partition for the speed of memory vs 
 disk, then using swap space defeats the purpose.
 
Agreed (partially :-)

If your access is lumpy, or (not in this case) you are creating zillions
of files, or probably some other reasons, it still makes sense. For
example, in my case (gentoo emerge) it creates lots of small files that
it creates, uses, then forgets about. By using tmpfs, they don't get
flushed to disk in the normal course of events, and if they do, chances
are I no longer care.

And the OP didn't mention speed. Maybe that's not why he wanted ramdisk?
After all, isn't the whole point of Pick that a memory-starved Pick
machine can still outrun an Oracle with ram coming out its ears? :-)

Cheers,
Wol

 George Gallen
 Senior Programmer/Analyst
 Accounting/Data Division
 ggal...@wyanokegroup.com
 ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220
 The Wyanoke Group
 http://www.wyanokegroup.com
 
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
 [u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Wols Lists 
 [antli...@youngman.org.uk]
 Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 7:28 PM
 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
 Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?
 
 On 25/08/11 16:47, George Gallen wrote:
 keep in mind:

 SSD drives have a limited number of writes (much better today than before)
 tempfs do not (or at least I don't think so)
 SSD drives however usually can store a LOT more than a tempfs file, which
 depends on your physical memory - You couldn't create a 100GB tempfs
 if you wanted to
 
 Completely wrong ... :-)
 
 My /tmp dir happens to be 8Gb in size - on a system with 8Gb of ram. I
 *also* have a 20Gb /var/tmp/portage. Both of these are tmpfs systems, so
 I have 28Gb of tmpfs on a system with only 8Gb of ram :-)
 
 That said, you must have sufficient total memory - I've got something in
 excess of 40Gb of total address space. I'm not sure how big my swap
 partitions are, but there's more than 32Gb (my rule is at least twice
 the mobo's max ram capacity, and with 1.5Tb of disk space, that's
 peanuts :-)
 
 But ram disks do default to half available ram, and that burnt me when I
 first hit it...
 
 SSD drives don't forget when you reboot

 But that's the whole point of ram disks :-)
 
 Cheers,
 Wol
 ___
 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 Pick U2?

2011-08-25 Thread Daniel McGrath

I've used them in development, but not in Production.

I am just about to post an article that includes usage; I just haven't had time 
to finish proof-reading it.

For windows, check it this question: 
http://superuser.com/questions/34388/whats-the-best-ramdisk-for-windows

Regards,
Dan

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of DavidJMurray 
(mvdbs.com)
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 9:19 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?


Is anyone using a RAMDisk with U2 files?

I have noticed that there are two types of ram disks within Linux - tmpfs and 
/dev/ram1 which can be used to create a small file system.

Does anyone have any practical experience on these options?

Is there an effective option for MS-Windows?

Cheers,
djm


Daniel McGrath wrote:
 
 
 6) Not only can you use U2 in a relational manner, complete with SQL 
 access, but since its core data structure are hash tables, if you want 
 to use it just as a key-value store look no further. If you want to 
 run it is a key-value store in memory (aka Memcache), mount a RAMDisk 
 and place the file there. Voila. No need to configure separate 
 systems, as flexible as you want it to be. You can even replicate from 
 it to multiple other servers if you want. Want it encrypted too? Done!
 
 
 


-

Learn and Do
Excel and Share


http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com
--
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--tp32061959p32335234.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
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?

2011-08-25 Thread John Thompson

Well I guess I should rephrase...

It is seen as another block device to the OS, Windows, Linux or what have
you.

So, in Windows it would be a drive letter.
In Linux it would be a block device that you could partition and format.

I have not personally used it, but, there are folks out there using it in
the relational database world.

The cheaper route to go would be to create a ramdisk in Linux, in the RAM
itself... I have not done that in a long time.

I have never created a RAMDISK in windows... not since the DOS days anyway
at least.

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:28 AM, John Thompson jthompson...@gmail.comwrote:

Its expensive... and it seems fairly safe as IBM, HP, and Dell are all
selling it now...

Take a look at this:

http://www.fusionio.com/

http://www-304.ibm.com/shop/americas/content/home/store_IBMPublicUSA/en_US/ibmfusionio.html

It basically acts just like a disk from what I understand, except that you
can't boot from it.

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:19 AM, DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com)
nab...@mvdbs.com wrote:

Is anyone using a RAMDisk with U2 files?

I have noticed that there are two types of ram disks within Linux - tmpfs
and /dev/ram1 which can be used to create a small file system.

Does anyone have any practical experience on these options?

Is there an effective option for MS-Windows?

Cheers,
djm

Daniel McGrath wrote:

6) Not only can you use U2 in a relational manner, complete with SQL
access, but since its core data structure are hash tables, if you want
to
use it just as a key-value store look no further. If you want to run it
is
a key-value store in memory (aka Memcache), mount a RAMDisk and place
the
file there. Voila. No need to configure separate systems, as flexible as
you want it to be. You can even replicate from it to multiple other
servers if you want. Want it encrypted too? Done!

Learn and Do
Excel and Share

http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--tp32061959p32335234.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

--
John Thompson

--
John Thompson
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-08-25 Thread DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com)



I mean using the existing RAM within the system to create and mount a small
file system which a temporary U2 file can be created and used; rather than a
complete SSD device.



John Thompson-15 wrote:
 
 Its expensive... and it seems fairly safe as IBM, HP, and Dell are all
 selling it now...
 
 
 
 


-

Learn and Do
Excel and Share


http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com 
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--tp32061959p32335366.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-08-25 Thread John Thompson

Yes, but, old school ramdisks (i.e. creating disks in existing RAM),
aren't exactly reliable if something goes wrong (i.e. power anomalies, bad
memory block,  etc.).  So whatever you would be storing would have to be
temporary (which I guess you have already said), AND, you would have to NOT
care if you lost it in a production environment.

At least from what I remember of them... but like I said its been a while
for me.  I'm sure someone has tried it before :)

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:35 AM, DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com) nab...@mvdbs.com
 wrote:



 I mean using the existing RAM within the system to create and mount a small
 file system which a temporary U2 file can be created and used; rather than
 a
 complete SSD device.



 John Thompson-15 wrote:
 
  Its expensive... and it seems fairly safe as IBM, HP, and Dell are all
  selling it now...
 
 
 
 


 -

 Learn and Do
 Excel and Share


 http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com
 --
 View this message in context:
 http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--tp32061959p32335366.html
 Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

 ___
 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] Why Pick U2?

2011-08-25 Thread George Gallen

I use the following scripts with our Linux system

[george@alpha mbin]$ cat mount-temp
/bin/mount -t tmpfs -o size=1G,nr_inodes=5k tmpfs /usr/tmpfs
(cd /usr ; /bin/tar xvf /usr/drive1/tempfsbackup .)

[george@alpha mbin]$ cat unmount-temp
(cd /usr ; /bin/tar cvf /usr/drive1/tempfsbackup ./tmpfs)
/bin/umount /usr/tmpfs

First I created the /usr/tmpfs manually (by executing the first line of 
mount-temp)
Second, I cd'd into the directory, then UV to create a UV account
Third, I went into the UV login account, and linked it as a valid account (So I 
could reference Q pointers)

I run the unmount script to tar up the account first and save the tar file, 
then release the tempfs
I run the mount script to create the tempfs, then untar the account

I forget what the max size of the /tmpfs can be (I just set mine up with 1G)

George


 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-
 boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com)
 Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:35 AM
 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
 Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?
 
 
 
 I mean using the existing RAM within the system to create and mount a
 small
 file system which a temporary U2 file can be created and used; rather
 than a
 complete SSD device.
 
 
 
 John Thompson-15 wrote:
 
  Its expensive... and it seems fairly safe as IBM, HP, and Dell are
 all
  selling it now...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -
 
 Learn and Do
 Excel and Share
 
 
 http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com
 --
 View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--
 tp32061959p32335366.html
 Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
 ___
 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?

2011-08-25 Thread George Gallen

keep in mind:

SSD drives have a limited number of writes (much better today than before)
tempfs do not (or at least I don't think so)
SSD drives however usually can store a LOT more than a tempfs file, which
depends on your physical memory - You couldn't create a 100GB tempfs
if you wanted to
SSD drives don't forget when you reboot

 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-
 boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com)
 Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:35 AM
 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
 Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?
 
 
 
 I mean using the existing RAM within the system to create and mount a
 small
 file system which a temporary U2 file can be created and used; rather
 than a
 complete SSD device.
 
 
 
 John Thompson-15 wrote:
 
  Its expensive... and it seems fairly safe as IBM, HP, and Dell are
 all
  selling it now...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -
 
 Learn and Do
 Excel and Share
 
 
 http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com
 --
 View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--
 tp32061959p32335366.html
 Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
 ___
 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?

2011-08-25 Thread John Thompson

It looks like you could do it in Windows 2000 Server natively...

http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Search/en-US?query=ramdiskac=8

Not sure what they did with it in 2003/2008 Server.  They may call it a
RAMDrive

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:43 AM, George Gallen ggal...@wyanokegroup.comwrote:

 I use the following scripts with our Linux system

 [george@alpha mbin]$ cat mount-temp
 /bin/mount -t tmpfs -o size=1G,nr_inodes=5k tmpfs /usr/tmpfs
 (cd /usr ; /bin/tar xvf /usr/drive1/tempfsbackup .)

 [george@alpha mbin]$ cat unmount-temp
 (cd /usr ; /bin/tar cvf /usr/drive1/tempfsbackup ./tmpfs)
 /bin/umount /usr/tmpfs

 First I created the /usr/tmpfs manually (by executing the first line of
 mount-temp)
 Second, I cd'd into the directory, then UV to create a UV account
 Third, I went into the UV login account, and linked it as a valid account
 (So I could reference Q pointers)

 I run the unmount script to tar up the account first and save the tar file,
 then release the tempfs
 I run the mount script to create the tempfs, then untar the account

 I forget what the max size of the /tmpfs can be (I just set mine up with
 1G)

 George


  -Original Message-
  From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-
  boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com)
  Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:35 AM
  To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
  Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?
 
 
 
  I mean using the existing RAM within the system to create and mount a
  small
  file system which a temporary U2 file can be created and used; rather
  than a
  complete SSD device.
 
 
 
  John Thompson-15 wrote:
  
   Its expensive... and it seems fairly safe as IBM, HP, and Dell are
  all
   selling it now...
  
  
  
  
 
 
  -
 
  Learn and Do
  Excel and Share
 
 
  http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com
  --
  View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--
  tp32061959p32335366.html
  Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
  ___
  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




-- 
John Thompson
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-08-25 Thread George Gallen

as for windows - I used to use a program called clone drive or something like 
that
It would create a virtual drive from memory

http://virtual-clonedrive.en.softonic.com/

 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-
 boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com)
 Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:19 AM
 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
 Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?
 
 
 Is anyone using a RAMDisk with U2 files?
 
 I have noticed that there are two types of ram disks within Linux -
 tmpfs
 and /dev/ram1 which can be used to create a small file system.
 
 Does anyone have any practical experience on these options?
 
 Is there an effective option for MS-Windows?
 
 Cheers,
 djm
 
 
 Daniel McGrath wrote:
 
 
  6) Not only can you use U2 in a relational manner, complete with SQL
  access, but since its core data structure are hash tables, if you
 want to
  use it just as a key-value store look no further. If you want to run
 it is
  a key-value store in memory (aka Memcache), mount a RAMDisk and place
 the
  file there. Voila. No need to configure separate systems, as flexible
 as
  you want it to be. You can even replicate from it to multiple other
  servers if you want. Want it encrypted too? Done!
 
 
 
 
 
 -
 
 Learn and Do
 Excel and Share
 
 
 http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com
 --
 View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--
 tp32061959p32335234.html
 Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
 ___
 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?

2011-08-25 Thread DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com)



I was looking at writing a similar article/blog post as I am reading on
coalesced hashing at the moment.

I'll wait until yours appears.



Daniel McGrath wrote:
 
 
 I am just about to post an article that includes usage; I just haven't had
 time to finish proof-reading it.
 
 
 


-

Learn and Do
Excel and Share


http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com 
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--tp32061959p32335579.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-08-25 Thread Wols Lists

On 25/08/11 16:47, George Gallen wrote:
 keep in mind:
 
 SSD drives have a limited number of writes (much better today than before)
 tempfs do not (or at least I don't think so)
 SSD drives however usually can store a LOT more than a tempfs file, which
 depends on your physical memory - You couldn't create a 100GB tempfs
 if you wanted to

Completely wrong ... :-)

My /tmp dir happens to be 8Gb in size - on a system with 8Gb of ram. I
*also* have a 20Gb /var/tmp/portage. Both of these are tmpfs systems, so
I have 28Gb of tmpfs on a system with only 8Gb of ram :-)

That said, you must have sufficient total memory - I've got something in
excess of 40Gb of total address space. I'm not sure how big my swap
partitions are, but there's more than 32Gb (my rule is at least twice
the mobo's max ram capacity, and with 1.5Tb of disk space, that's
peanuts :-)

But ram disks do default to half available ram, and that burnt me when I
first hit it...

 SSD drives don't forget when you reboot
 
But that's the whole point of ram disks :-)

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-08-25 Thread Wols Lists

On 25/08/11 16:19, DavidJMurray (mvdbs.com) wrote:
 Is anyone using a RAMDisk with U2 files?
 
 I have noticed that there are two types of ram disks within Linux - tmpfs
 and /dev/ram1 which can be used to create a small file system.
 
 Does anyone have any practical experience on these options?

tmpfs on linux is pretty reliable. From my other post you can see I use
it by default :-)

Not sure what you're trying to do, but you might want to combine it with
union mounting. If you want to create temporary workspace, you might be
better creating it on disk and throwing it away when you're finished,
but if you really want to use ramdisk then ...

Create a set of empty files pointed to from your VOC (or VOCLIB)
elsewhere. Union mount a tmpfs over the directory containing your empty
files, and then you don't need to worry about whether they're there
after a reboot or anything like that. When the system comes up, it will
see the empty files on the hard disk. As the files are updated, they'll
be stored on ramdisk. When the system reboots, the updated files will be
lost and the system will once again see the empty files on disk ... usw
usw usw.

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-08-25 Thread George Gallen

But swap space isn't really memory, it's disk and nowhere near as fast as 
memory, and (I don't know for sure) probably
even far slower than SSD's.

In reality, if your creating a tempfs partition for the speed of memory vs 
disk, then using swap space defeats the purpose.

George Gallen
Senior Programmer/Analyst
Accounting/Data Division
ggal...@wyanokegroup.com
ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220
The Wyanoke Group
http://www.wyanokegroup.com

From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Wols Lists 
[antli...@youngman.org.uk]
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 7:28 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

On 25/08/11 16:47, George Gallen wrote:
 keep in mind:

 SSD drives have a limited number of writes (much better today than before)
 tempfs do not (or at least I don't think so)
 SSD drives however usually can store a LOT more than a tempfs file, which
 depends on your physical memory - You couldn't create a 100GB tempfs
 if you wanted to

Completely wrong ... :-)

My /tmp dir happens to be 8Gb in size - on a system with 8Gb of ram. I
*also* have a 20Gb /var/tmp/portage. Both of these are tmpfs systems, so
I have 28Gb of tmpfs on a system with only 8Gb of ram :-)

That said, you must have sufficient total memory - I've got something in
excess of 40Gb of total address space. I'm not sure how big my swap
partitions are, but there's more than 32Gb (my rule is at least twice
the mobo's max ram capacity, and with 1.5Tb of disk space, that's
peanuts :-)

But ram disks do default to half available ram, and that burnt me when I
first hit it...

 SSD drives don't forget when you reboot

But that's the whole point of ram disks :-)

Cheers,
Wol
___
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?

2011-07-16 Thread Rob Sobers

that will address some of the
issues people have raised in this thread.

UniObjects (COM) is an ancient interface. Don't forgot that there is now
EDA, a SOAP-based web-service provider and a RESTful web-service provider
(in beta).

Better resources: more is coming. U2DevZone is up, it is now open (no sign
in required anymore) with articles, video tutorials and podcasts. You can
take this as a solid indication that the folks here are committed to
providing material that makes U2 a more attractive option.

Yes, times are interesting in the database world right now. There has not
been this much attention and diversity for as long as I can remember. I'd
love to see you (and everyone else) at U2U next year, meet some of
management engineering and see what is happening in the U2/MV world and
maybe even provide some insight into what keeps you interested in the MV
world and what doesn't. Obviously there is something in there that interests
your technical mind for you still to be posting on this list. :)

Cheers,
Dan

PS: Thanks also to all those that sent direct replies to me. If I haven't
got back to you yet, I will endeavor to do so next week.

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:
u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 4:41 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

Hey Dan,

Great response! Thanks for chiming in. Let me address some of your points.

Cherry-picking individual features from one database to compare them, then
cherry-picking from completely different database when counter-points are
raised is not exactly a technically sound (or fair) way to do comparisons.

You're certainly right, but that's not I'm doing. I believe the only
direct feature comparison I made was to MongoDB, which falls into the same
class of database as U2.

Besides, the discussion isn't purely about technical capabilities (though
they certainly matter and U2 has been sluggish with new feature development)
as much as it is about the overall value proposition.

I'm not trying to be a troll, or incite the folks that love U2, or call out
Rocket. As a long-time U2 user, I'm simply making an honest and blunt
statement that I would not pick U2 as my database on a new product, and I'm
curious to hear if others can argue in favor of U2 given the rise of lower
cost, popular alternatives in the same niche.

I think it's extremely hard to argue in favor of U2 give its price tag and
underdeveloped ecosystem.

For *me personally*, when I'm contemplating which technology to use on a
new project, some of the things that are very important are:

1.) Mainstream adoption. If I have a wacky problem with U2, I basically 2
places to go: Rocket support or this list. That's it. You can't overlook
the beneifts of using mainstream technologies.

http://www.google.com/trends?q=rocket+u2%2C+unidata%2C+mongodbctab=0geo=alldate=ytdsort=2

Again, when I was working with U2 full-time, we were consistently finding
core bugs in U2 that hampered business, and it would be months on end
without any progress from IBM.

(If you don't believe me, try using some of the SQL features in the latest
build of UniData.)

2) Ecosystem and accessibility. Are there APIs, language bindings, and
libraries available, or am I limited?

I brought this up on another thread -- what if I need to parse JSON in
UniBasic, or I want to generate a PDF document? There simply aren't a
wealth of UniBasic libraries available like there are in Java, Ruby, .NET,
etc.

This can be partially addressed by making U2 more accessible from modern
languages or at the very least, provide better guidance and resources to
help the users create their own. Right now all we have is UniObjects, which
is kinda crappy.

c) Cost. U2 is expensive for what you get. That might have been justified
in the 90s, and 2000s when theren't were viable MV alternatives. But now
there are alternatives. Free ones.

It's easy to say that U2 has been around for a while, so it must be
reliable and enterprise grade. But I can't tell you how many times I've
had to take my UniData system down and run guide because of database-level
corruption. Anecdotal yes, but so are your claims against MongoDB. I
believe Foursquare still uses it, and I'm going to venture a wild guess that
their load is far greater than any single U2 customer's.

I also don't buy the case for writing your business logic in what is
basically a hamstrung stored procedure language. This isn't necessary to
get the benefits you're describing. As long as you properly tier your code
so that your business logic is separate from your presentation layer, it
doesn't matter where the code lives physically.

SQL access in U2 has been a pain point for me in the past, but maybe I was
doing it wrong or things have changed lately.

The idea of using U2 as in in-memory cache is an interesting idea

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-07-16 Thread George Gallen

This essentially is what I was working on with my perl routines to interface 
with UV.

You would open a file giving the accout and filename and receive a token back
Then you could read items with an idname and the token getting an array back
pass a TCL command and be able to get back an array of ID's

Yes, it would be better if I could do these without having to write my own 
API..I agree.

George Gallen
Senior Programmer/Analyst
Accounting/Data Division
ggal...@wyanokegroup.com
ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220
The Wyanoke Group
http://www.wyanokegroup.com

From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers 
[rsob...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 12:37 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

It will be a big day for me when I can finally do something like I've
written below from programming language X and have a reasonably powerful,
user-friendly API for working with native U2 data.

db = UniData::Connection.new(localhost).db(mydb)
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Why Pick U2?

2011-07-16 Thread Daniel McGrath (Home)

Play nice now Rob,

This is bordering on a 'holy war'. You seem to want to reiterate previous
points, ones that no one has argued with you.

As I already said, U2 cannot target all markets, but you appear to want to
discount that and focus on the market of you choosing. I believe you grossly
underestimate the size of U2's market, so let us just leave that at that.

Brian Leach as released several books, but that is neither here nor there.
No one is making claims that it is mainstream with the general public. In
fact, this leads to the next point.

No, I did not overlook your Google trends link, I dismissed it as baiting.
You know as well as I do that it doesn't mean anything. If you wish to
disagree, discuss that one with your boss first:
http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/70606/trends-of-java-and-javascript/70607#70607

U2 is not marketed as a standalone product like MDB, it is embedded in it.
Most people running it wouldn't even know.

I highly doubt that there will be a new acquirer for U2. I think it is safe
to safe that Rocket U2 will stay as is for a very, very long time. If you
want to know why, have a look at RS and have a look at the discussions
around why U2 was sold by IBM.

Once again, to address the majority of your post, I am not arguing that
there are things we can do better and we are working on it.

Tell Joel it is about networking at U2U, there is a whole market out there
that might not have heard of FogCreek or their offerings. :)

If you want further discussion on anything, feel free to continue it with my
privately. Not because I don't want it discussed openly, but because I'm
sure the rest of the people on this list would like this put to rest

Best regards,
Dan

Dan,

Let me me re-phrase my statement:

For 99% of software projects, MongoDB destroys U2 in every single aspect.
And it's free.

The fact is, most people aren't developing emergency systems. And even if I
were building a banking or emergency system today, despite U2's longevity,
I'd argue that up-time alone is not enough considering:

1. I can't find a book on U2 (how to administer, scale, interface, etc.).
2. I can't easily find technical talent who have experience with U2.
3. The technology has changed hands a number of times over the past decade.
(What prevents the next acquirer from ceasing development?)

Yes, you're right -- the people who have been using U2 for the last 20 years
successfully should probably stick with it for its reliability. But someone
searching for a new database solution is going to be met with a multiple
barriers to entry (the first being discovering that U2 even exists).

Up-time is one aspect. What about scaling? Rapid development? Community
support and involvement? Look at what Craiglist is doing with MongoDB. Did
you overlook my link to the Google search term comparison?

I browsed through the 116 page manual on EDA :-), but I don't want to have
to convert my data in order to access from anything but UniBasic.

It will be a big day for me when I can finally do something like I've
written below from programming language X and have a reasonably powerful,
user-friendly API for working with native U2 data.

db = UniData::Connection.new(localhost).db(mydb)

I digress.

I don't want to continue my argument in fear of sounding like I'm just here
to bash U2. That's not the case. I definitely interested in U2 at some
level even though I don't work with it much anymore.

Maybe it's something like Stockholm syndrome. I worked in the U2 bubble for
so long. Now that I'm out and benefiting widly from flexibility and
openness and thriving ecosystems, and I want U2 to be that way too.

The verdict is still out for me on Rocket, but I'd love to see the progress
you're talking about come to fruition. I don't know if I can justify U2U to
Fog Creek, but we'll see. :-)

All the best,

-Rob
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Why-Pick-U2--tp32061959p32075733.html
Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

57 matches

Mail list logo