> From: "Thurman Pedigo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net > Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:13:30 -0500 > To: <hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net> > Subject: RE: [Hardhats-members] BIG NEWS re HealtheVet- St. Petersburg Tim es > > Wilderness pretty well describes where I am. I bought Knuth's "Sorting and > Searching" something like 25 years ago, when I was working on KFAM, and > never really understood what he was saying. This has been most helpful, > though I obviously remain in kindergarten.
As are most of us, Thurman. The question is: Are we willing to acknowledge that is so about ourselves. Years ago, David Van Hooser--the senior manager in the DVA-Dept of Medicine & Surgery, responsible for the DHCP program--asked me why recommendations from one of his most senior managers of DHCP system development had proven to be without any merit. I pointed out to him that none of us (I was one of those senior managers) were professionally trained in information technology. Instead, we were self-declared IT professionals. Thus, we were already proven to be likely to self-declare expertise in IT when he asked us to express an opinion. This is an age old problem. I refer you to Amadeus, in which the king's court specialist in classical music was asked his opinion of the new Mozart work, and replied that "it has too many notes!". Ask a fool a question, and you are at risk for getting a foolish answer. So remember Thurman, many of the voices you hear on this party line are similarly self-declared experts, when if fact we are mostly, myself included, just students in the world of IT. > > Though it does appear we progressed beyond the index file addressing a > "separate" flat file. Well, I hate to deflate your balloon, and send you crashing on the Plain of Confusion, but the primary index of a VA FileMan file is in reality an 'index file' that 'addresses a "separate" flat file'. :-) The more things change, the more they stay the same. > I guess the nice part of that system was one could > read the data in the flat file, even after pointers became corrupt, AND if > the data was clean re-index it with a utility. Yes, the VA FileMan has a utility that will re-index the "name" field (the so called .01 field) if that index ever becomes 'corrupt'. That index is merely a simple list of (read "copy of") the up-right data in a sorted order, paired with the up-right data INTERNEL ENTRY NUMBER's (IEN), where the IEN are 'pointers'. > I sometimes wish I had spent > that programming time on MUMPS, however, $15,000 for a compiler in 1978 $ > was a great leap. I know the feeling. It was with great trepidation that I signed the Request for Purchase of an Intersystems M-11 license for that exact amount in September of that year. As a person without any prior experience with MUMPS, and with a 'mandate' to deliver a patient care application to end-user's by May of 1979, and do that on a 'part-time' basis in addition to a full time job in that VA medical center, I was just a bit concerned. :-) So, imagine my shock and surprise when the application went live in May and worked as envisioned providing the means for doctors to prescribe diets for diabetic people in terms of nutrient profiles. Dietitians were able to take those nutrient profile 'prescriptions', and in collaboration with each patient, and using the MUMPS application I developed, produce meal plans for each patient that harmonized with the diet styles and preferences of the patient. I am certain that I could not have accomplished that task under the circumstances of that time with any other technology then available. I do not believe that there has been any new technology developed since then that could displace the advantages provided by M technology as available today. I must stress that this work was critically and specifically enabled for success by the use of a set of programmer development tools that eventually became known as the VA File Manager. George Timson personally 'saved my life that night' when he sent me a collection of MUMPS routines over a lowly dial-up connection at 1200 baud, for which I am eternally grateful. > > Thanks for the lesson, > > thurman I appreciate your thanks, T. Regards, Richard. P. S. It is worthwhile at this point, to make another comment about compare/contrast discussions concerning database management systems. Remember, I have just recently offered comments that distinguish among various "layers of Abstraction". Thus, relational database concepts are at a relatively high level layer of abstraction vis-à-vis the atomic level of bits and bytes in some long term disk based storage system. The MUMPS global system is also a higher level of abstraction than at the disk storage level. Likewise, VA File Manager is a HIGH level abstraction as well. However, take special notice that the VA File Manager is a level of abstraction that is "above" the MUMPS global level of abstraction. It now is possible to see that a compare/contrast of a relational database system (SQL) with systems involving MUMPS technology open up the prospect that such comparisons may inappropriately cross "layer" boundaries. I suggest the a VA File Manager to SQL database comparison is more proper, than an SQL-to-MUMPS global comparison. RGD. ... .... ..... ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id396&op=click _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
