Hello Baker, We have a customer who is processing tens of thousands of transactions a day. These transactions are centralized on SQL Server so that the Oracle ESB, UniVerse and Web Systems can share the data. The key LOB Application is on Universe, so it drives the live process. Every weekend they transfer millions of records in a large batch to ensure that everything is synchronized.
The data flows both ways to SQL and Oracle. This is a Worldwide 24x7 company that is experiencing massive monthly growth, the transactions generate a serious amount of revenue. The environment needs to be fast, stable and scalable. The technology (Legacy to SQL Bridge) can access remote databases from Universe. The tables are viewed as if they are Universe files, records as items and fields as attributes. This lets Universe read, write and select data from the remote databases as if they were Universe files. On our demonstration environment here are the numbers. Using the Legacy to SQL Bridge to transfer data from SQL Server into PICK took about 1.2 seconds for 10,000 rows. Thatbs over 8,000 rows per second. Going the other ways, we were able to get, in the end, about 250 rows per second, as I recall. A better SQL Server configuration would probably have helped. These are actually very modest numbers, when you consider the configuration that was running: b" Everything was running on a Lenovo Laptop: o Intel Centrino Duo o 2 GB RAM o 100 GB Disk (very full, fragmentation moderate) b" Windows XP Professional b" SQL Server 2005 b" Microsoft Virtual PC 2004, running: o Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3: o' Universe 12 might have been 11? o' FusionWare Integration Server with the Legacy to SQL Bridge Everything was vying for CPU and I/O on one system, and we had the overhead of Microsoftbs Virtual environment (not known to be best of breed at this point). So, in an ideal tuned environment, the numbers could be much better. Then again, in a real-world environment where both your MultiValue and your SQL systems are shared, overloaded, hardworking systems, these numbers may still be about right. Hope that is useful. Janet /AD -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ross Ferris Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 12:54 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] Fastest Bi-Directional data transfer btwn MV and non-MV dbms Baker, Given the scenario you have just outlined, and my imaginings of the way that each of the 3 systems SHOULD work, you have no likelihood of deadlock collisions (this could be guaranteed with possibly relatively minor "tweaks" to all sides of the equation). If you want a "solution", I just need a few more FACTS (guestimates AOK for numbers) - what is the database behind the WCS system - does the WCS have automated/robotic picking, manual/RF or a combination - average number of line items on a transaction originating from the Universe system - average line items for an order from the web portal - assume you want LIVE inventory on the portal (may be reasons why this is BAD, but that is another story) - peak transactions/hr from OLTP & web portal Baker, I know you mean well, but I'm just questioning the need for "Fastest" in this scenario, unless I see some seriously LARGE numbers for some of the above :-) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage > Better by Design! [ad] BTW, we also do applications, covering areas like web ordering, warehousing, distribution etc .... just for the record, and have had to tackle issues like this before [/ad] >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Baker Hughes >Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2007 12:20 AM >To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >Subject: RE: [U2] Fastest Bi-Directional data transfer btwn MV and non- >MV dbms > >Ross, > >Yes, there is a real-world application to the question, at least one >where I may try to 'sell' the solution after the theory is worked out. >3 Different systems play with the same live Inventory of products: a >UniVerse based OLTP, a MS SQL db based web-order portal, and a Warehouse >Control System which fills the orders and receives stock. At night we >batch the daily stock receipts from WCS up to UniVerse, update the Avail >to Sell qty for the OLTP and allocate Order Reserve Qty to backorders. >Then UV sends the updated ATS to the web database (which is always 24 >hours behind). > >Ross has asked the most astute question in all this, that of data >collisions, where the same product is updated on 2 or 3 sides at once. >This is perhaps the question that looms largest and keeps people (like >us) in batch mode rather than real-time. > > >Thanks everyone for the very worthy contributions to this science. >-Baker > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ross Ferris >Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:58 AM >To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >Subject: RE: [U2] Fastest Bi-Directional data transfer btwn MV and non >MV dbms > >Baker, > >How "live" and "active" is this bi-directional transfer likely to be? Do >you need to consider the possibility of data collisions (ie: will >someone change a record in your UV database that could also be changed >on the "other" end) .... OR are the discrete changes somewhat "atomic >transactions", with no chance of duplication > >Are both systems running "live" databases? What are you REALLY trying to >do (your question is nearly as big as Texas) ... if you have some >specific goal in mind, then some potential road blocks may be removed >(or emerge) > >Ross Ferris >Stamina Software >Visage > Better by Design! >------- >u2-users mailing list >u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
