Keep in mind, the session only stays open for 1 second and then logs off. So you would just need enough licenses for the amount of traffic you had. Which brings us back to the stupid per user license fees that I hate that software companies do, but, thats a whole other can of worms.
Nothings perfect it seems. Maybe one day there will be a better "web" connector for MV. So far all the ones I've seen, either aren't very well documented, or they have some problem or other. Then again, I haven't been doing this that long... just my initial observations. On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Symeon Breen <syme...@gmail.com> wrote: > Our test harness works in such a manner - shelling out to start a udt > process is not very scaleable IMO and does sound rather inefficient. Also > from a licencing point of view each shelled out process will take a udt > license. These are limited so the number of apache requests would also have > to be limited. But also with anything through unirpcd device licencing can > be used (the first 10 connections from the same ip take just one licence) > this would not be possible if php is just shelling out to udt. > > -----Original Message----- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of John Thompson > Sent: 01 December 2011 20:27 > To: U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Unidata 7.1 Unresponsive UO Connection > > Kevin's idea of using Apache as the connector and php as the scripting > language... > > Works like so... > And Kevin can chime in if I get something wrong, because I certainly did > not > architect this. > > Imagine this scenario. > > -A Linux Web Server running Apache > -A U2 server (with some form of nix) also running Apache -A php script on > the Linux Web Server sends a http request with some data and a U2 > subroutine > name to the U2 server. > -A php script on the U2 server receives this request and fires a U2 > session, > which then calls a subroutine, takes the data, writes out a result, and > then > logs off. > -The Linux Web Server then gets the request back and presents it to the > user. > > So really all you are doing, is sending http requests to the U2 server and > getting a response back. Pretend that two web servers are communicating > (i.e. curl, etc.). However, they are on the local network sitting next to > each other in this case. > > In the login Paragraph of the account you want to use, you have to write > some code to detect some nix environment variables that are set telling U2 > that it will be an Apache session (you create your own) so that any menus > or > whatever don't get called. > > So in essence, instead of using UniObjects, you are using Apache, and > shelling U2 processes as you need them. > > However, you eluded to the fact that your requests take 300 ms or so. > These requests usually take around 800 ms to 1 sec (at least on my 5 year > old AIX box using firebug). > > I have never worked with UniObjects for java. It sounds like the previous > poster has had some good success with it. > > I think Kevin's goals in this scenario above, were to keep it simple, and > make it cross platform, while still getting good performance. I just > happened, to stumble into him at a conference and have been borrowing the > idea. So I'll leave Kevin to comment on any further details that I did not > cover, or may have covered poorly. > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Symeon Breen <syme...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > So how does the php script connect into unidata ? Is it using intercall > ? > > if so it is exactly the same mechanism as uniobjects (via unirpcd) so > > what would the benefit be ? > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of John > > Thompson > > Sent: 01 December 2011 17:48 > > To: U2 Users List > > Subject: Re: [U2] Unidata 7.1 Unresponsive UO Connection > > > > I thought I would chime in here a little... as I've been using Kevin's > > idea to create some web applications (none of which are live, except > > for a few management reports- not because I've had problems, but, > > mainly because priorities keep changing - if you know how that goes) > > > > At any rate. I have a management report that pops up on an > > Ipad/Iphone/Droid or whatever. > > The UV process that gets fired goes in and grabs Sales data for 30 > > store locations and spits it back. > > > > Using firebug, I can see how long the php script that calls the UV > > process takes. > > It does its reads, etc., and then bottles up the data and sends back a > > string (1.2 KB in size) in JSON or XML or whatever in around 800 ms to > > 1 second consistently. > > > > So I guess thats consistent with what you were saying. Just thought I > > would add to the info. > > > > However, I did notice that UV on AIX is limited to 256MB of RAM per > > session. > > So I wonder if Linux would behave differently? > > > > Ironically, I'm in the process of setting up a UV Linux machine for > > our production system, because AIX 5 support is ending soon. So I > > guess I'll find out soon enough. > > > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Symeon Breen <syme...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Similarly here - I have two web services that my apps connect to - > > > one is pooled, the other not. Typical time for a transaction using > > > the pooled one is between 300 and 600 ms, whereas the non pooled for > > > the same transaction is between 1 and 2. > > > > > > I have 2 because my apps connect to the pooled web service with a 2 > > > second timeout, then fail over to the non pooled. I have to do this > > > cos the pooled connections hang several times a day (hence why I > > > have to restart unirpcd and kill off the pooled udt processes) The > > > problem is not in the DB code as it happens randomly and with our > > > logging it is definitely coming out of the DB code and then refuses > > > to accept any more data on the socket, and the .net code is very > > > simple, so it must be in the uniobjects layer or unirpcd. I have > > > tried several dll's to no avail, so we will have to get a new linux box > > > with the very latest udt and see how that goes. Long sigh ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > > > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Holt, > > > Jake > > > Sent: 01 December 2011 15:12 > > > To: U2 Users List > > > Subject: Re: [U2] Unidata 7.1 Unresponsive UO Connection > > > > > > Did you do any actual testing on that to confirm it? I created a > > > WCF web service that manages a set of shared connections for all of > > > my .net apps that access UniVerse. I found that starting the > > > session took much longer then processing most of my requests if the > > > session was > > already open. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > > > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Kevin > > > King > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:00 PM > > > To: U2 Users List > > > Subject: Re: [U2] Unidata 7.1 Unresponsive UO Connection > > > > > > Not focusing on connection pooling at this point but that may be a > > > consideration for the future. I've found that the overhead of the > > > two Apache method is so small that most of the gains offered by > > > connection pooling are minimized. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > ----- > > > No virus found in this message. > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > > Version: 10.0.1411 / Virus Database: 2102/4049 - Release Date: > > > 11/30/11 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 10.0.1411 / Virus Database: 2102/4050 - Release Date: > > 12/01/11 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1411 / Virus Database: 2102/4050 - Release Date: 12/01/11 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
