Re: [U2] New UV system -- AMD Opteron v. Xeon? PC architecture experts?
Considering all the discussion here, I'd like to ask a question and make a statement for those a little more familiar with server architecture I have a year old Sun Fire x4200 server, two Dual Core Opteron 275s, which performed much better with UV and in general than my brand spankin' new Dell PowerEdge 1950, with two Xeon Woodcrests (Core 2 Duo-based). Each machine has 16G RAM and similar hard drive configurations. Both run Windows Server 2003 x64 Standard Edition R2 Service Pack 2 and UV 10.2. Get this-- The new Dell benchmarked lower and does something very strange. On the Dell, the System process (not System Idle Process) often jumps between 3 and 20 percent, all the time. My suspicion is that AMD Opteron based multiprocessor (meaning multiple physical processors) perform better because they can transfer data between physical processors and associated DIMM slots across the hyper-fast HyperTransport bus, and not the slower (in the Dell's case, I believe ~700 MHz) system bus on Intel-based machines. Because the Sun machine is faster we are moving our production UV system back to it this weekend. Anyone want to confirm this for me? Or does anyone know how I can track down what the "System" process is actually -doing-? Just my experience, thanks-- Gabe --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: Re:[U2] New UV system
The other 'fun' you'll have is if they have serial printers. If memory serves, you'd have to convert them over to termservers if you go the Windows route so that they have network addresses (though my memory has been known to be faulty). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MAJ Programming Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:05 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: Re:[U2] New UV system Thanks for all who responded. I have to see how much gets printed versus gets downloaded (accuterm) and printed from the desktop. Thanks Mark Johnson - Original Message - From: "Ken Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 6:44 PM Subject: Re:[U2] New UV system > Dave Taylor did a wonderful job explaining the difference in porting > UV from NIX to NT and many of the things that should influence the > choice of base platforms. > > As someone who is porting from UV from AIX to Linux, I will add even > NIX to different NIX has its challenges in the area of printing. > There are lots of little variances between types of Unix that make > the process less than straight forward. > > I hope any attempting to do a migration gets assistance from someone > who has done the same migration. It will save a lot of pain and money. > > Thanks again Dave. > > Ken Hall > > At 12:00 PM 6/13/2007, Dave Taylor wrote: > >The major difference between UV/nix and UV/nt is that UV/nt has no print > >spooler - none whatsoever. > --- > 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/ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material not intended for Public use. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the material from any and all computers or devices. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: Re:[U2] New UV system
Thanks for all who responded. I have to see how much gets printed versus gets downloaded (accuterm) and printed from the desktop. Thanks Mark Johnson - Original Message - From: "Ken Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 6:44 PM Subject: Re:[U2] New UV system > Dave Taylor did a wonderful job explaining the difference in porting > UV from NIX to NT and many of the things that should influence the > choice of base platforms. > > As someone who is porting from UV from AIX to Linux, I will add even > NIX to different NIX has its challenges in the area of printing. > There are lots of little variances between types of Unix that make > the process less than straight forward. > > I hope any attempting to do a migration gets assistance from someone > who has done the same migration. It will save a lot of pain and money. > > Thanks again Dave. > > Ken Hall > > At 12:00 PM 6/13/2007, Dave Taylor wrote: > >The major difference between UV/nix and UV/nt is that UV/nt has no print > >spooler - none whatsoever. > --- > 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/
Re:[U2] New UV system
Dave Taylor did a wonderful job explaining the difference in porting UV from NIX to NT and many of the things that should influence the choice of base platforms. As someone who is porting from UV from AIX to Linux, I will add even NIX to different NIX has its challenges in the area of printing. There are lots of little variances between types of Unix that make the process less than straight forward. I hope any attempting to do a migration gets assistance from someone who has done the same migration. It will save a lot of pain and money. Thanks again Dave. Ken Hall At 12:00 PM 6/13/2007, Dave Taylor wrote: The major difference between UV/nix and UV/nt is that UV/nt has no print spooler - none whatsoever. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
[U2] New Release of XLr8Editor
U2logic is announcing the release 1.1.5.14 of XLr8Editor for Eclipse tool set. 1) For Universe users we have added caching to speed up the loading of the files the second time through. This is a clickable option on the preferences window option. 2) We have a dictionary editor. You can edit or delete dictionary items in a grid. This means you can see the entire dictionary set without having to TCL command or the like. The grid has sortable columns allowing many ways to view all dictionary items 3) The U2 database licensing requirements to run the XLr8Editor have been reduced to a single user. If you are not one of the over 1000 licensee's, you would need to know this product is total free. Unlike some other editors, we are feature rich with a complete tool set. XLr8 Tools and Environment consist of a robust editor, installer, resize tool, object editor, project editor and a web developer. No other tool allows you to add many other plug-in from other manufactures of Eclipse based products. This tool requires you to download from www.eclipse.org version 3.2.2 of the tool set. Additional you would need to load from www.sun.com a Java JRE less than 6.0. Currently, we do not support JRE from 6.0 above. And finally from our web site, you can download the instructions to make this all work. U2logic Team www.u2logic.com --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] Unidata Samples
On 6/13/07, Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi all - I am trying to find where I can get the samples mentioned in the Unidata docs. I have PE installed and the samples would hopefully help me get through a project faster than figuring it out on my own. Anyone know where I can get them? Depending on which end you're looking for the samples...backend (e.g. UD demo account -- /usr/udxx/demo) or front-end (e.g. UniObjects via the UniDK client tools), they should be installed by default even with PE edition. HTH, Andy --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re:[U2] New UV system
Hi Mark, The major difference between UV/nix and UV/nt is that UV/nt has no print spooler - none whatsoever. There is an hold file, but no queues. All print jobs are sent directly to the Windows spooler associated with the Windows printer to which they are directed. Once sent (spooled) to the Windows printer, you lose all control over the print job from UV. UV/nix does have a spooler, so moving to UV/nt will require a complete reorientation of their printing strategies, retraining of personnel and rewrite of all processes in which print commands (eg. SETPTR, SPOOL) are imbedded. If they have to move to a Windows platform and if they have to have a print spooler, SpoolerPlus will give them a generic Pick print spooler on UV/nt. But, it won't look anything like their current UV/nix print spooler (SP-ASSIGN, STARTPTR, etc. vs. SETPTR, SPOOL, etc.). If they use any SCO-based software outside of UV (communication, spreadsheets, reporting, etc), replacing that functionality will also be a purchase and integration expense. There are a number of UV/nix experts on this list who can confirm this, but I understand that nix requires less hardware resources than Windows OSs. Plus, they're used to a nix environment, so SCO or Linux may be the easiest transition for them. Can they just move their whole computing environment up to a faster box - SCO, UV and everything else? >From what I know, I think I would recommend that they stay with SCO or Linux. If they do move to Windows, you can install UV on XP/Pro, W2000 Pro, W2000 Server, W2003 Server. XP/Pro is the least expensive and requires the least in hardware resources. We have a number of installations on UV/nt and one on UV/aix. Please feel free to call me if you would like to discuss this further. Rgds, Dave Dave Taylor CEO Sysmark Information Systems, Inc. 49 Aspen Way Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 800-SYSMARK (800-797-6275) (O) 310-544-1974 (C) 310-561-5200 (F) 310-377-3550 www.sysmarkinfo.com Your Source for Integrated EDI Translation, DataSync Integration and Software Migration Authorized IBM Business Partner - Original Message - From: "MAJ Programming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 5:17 AM Subject: [U2] New UV system --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
[U2] Unidata Samples
Hi all - I am trying to find where I can get the samples mentioned in the Unidata docs. I have PE installed and the samples would hopefully help me get through a project faster than figuring it out on my own. Anyone know where I can get them? Thanks, Steve Long Spyderweb Technical Services, Inc. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] New UV system
Wol, One reason for using uvbackup is that the index file path names within UV are hard coded and I have had interesting issues when not using uvbackup to move work directory/accounts around between machines. Also, it gets rather tedious setting up the many VOC entries for the OS files again. Cheers, David Murray .learn and do .excel and share -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony Youngman Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 12:05 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] New UV system Why do you need uvbackup? I'm NOT recommending that you don't use it, but a while ago I had a linux box, a SCO box, and a Windows box, and quite happily copied UV files between all three of them using the OS-level copy command. Bearing in mind they all run on Intel chips, and byte order is a chip problem NOT an OS problem, you shouldn't have problems just copying the os-level directories around. DO play and test before you do anything for live, though! Cheers, Wol -Original Message- From: Manu Fernandes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 June 2007 15:46 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] New UV system Hi, You can run a 5 users of uv on a lite box (I do it on a notebook) Use W2003 server (W2003 is more demanding in ressource like UV, it can run on XP too ). To switch from sco to windows, you must use *uvbackup* tool into sco to prepare a file, then copy these file to windows and use *uvrestore* to restore the datas. (problem with special chars on unix vs windows)) There is a trouble with Type1 file, convert it to Type19 before copy. Under Windows, you must upgrade all your VOC entry where there is OS full path (check your datas eventually) I hope this help. Manu - Original Message - From: "MAJ Programming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 3:17 PM Subject: [U2] New UV system > All: > > I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They > would > like to move everything to a contemporary box. > > While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which kind > of > W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to switch > databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). > > Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. > > I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the > backup as > it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that > familiar > with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to resize > (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. > > I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. > > Thanks in advance > Mark Johnson > --- > 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/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] New UV system
> Seems to me a move to Linux would be better since they are probably more > familiar with a nix system. The spoolers are completely different. I agree with what Jerry said. In addition to his points, consider that changing the operating system means that you have to worry about any application code that launches operating system commands. You'll have to locate and change those. Maybe you'll be lucky, but it's a rare application that doesn't shell out to do something. Also, although UniVerse is rather forgiving about VOC pointers that use forward slashes rather than backward slashes, you'll have to be careful about making sure everything is installed on your Windows drive exactly the way it's installed on SCO, with paths relative to the current drive. And don't forget to check for application code that constructs file paths. Maybe there aren't any, but you need to be certain. There may be good reasons for switching to Windows, but it's not a decision that should be taken lightly. Tim Snyder Consulting I/T Specialist U2 Lab Services Information Management, IBM Software Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] New UV system
Chips aren't noisy. The cooling systems on them and in the cases are. That's Dell's ducted single-fan passive CPU cooling at work. I have AMD's all around here, as well as one Xeon, and I have relatively low noise. I build servers here to my specs and one of the things I strive for is low-RPM high-flow fans along with quiet power supplies. Having said that, the 5150+ Woodcrest Xeons are a bit cooler than comparable Opterons since they use less power. Regardless, they both still need decent air flow. Maybe the air flow design was changed between the two models? Or perhaps the O/S isn't throttling the fan on the Opteron box? With regards to cost, yes you can drop a load of cash on Opterons, when you compare them with a Xeon in the same Mhz range. Core speed isn't the entire comparison for a cost point. You should compare cache levels and MIPS benchmarks instead. Which model Opteron did you just buy and which Xeon(s) did you originally buy? I'll see if I can dig up some benchmarks. --- Glen Batchelor IT Director All-Spec Industries phone: (910) 332-0424 fax: (910) 763-5664 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- www.allspec.com --- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 12:17 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: RE: [U2] New UV system > > Glen: > > I bought a Dell dual-core AMD Opteron rack-mount server several months > ago, to go along with the 18 month old Xeon rack-mount server > we purchased. The machine was virtually identical, and cost more by the > way. > > The AMD is twice as loud as the Intel and is most annoying. It's always > something, isn't it? :-) > > Bill > > >-Original Message- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glen Batchelor > >Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 8:56 AM > >To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > >Subject: RE: [U2] New UV system > > > > Cost-wise, consider a dual-core AMD X2 system. If you have a > >little more funds, the 5140 or 5150 Xeons are well cached chips > >for the money. Either way, get a dual-CPU mainboard that is > >one-CPU capable so that you can drop in an "upgrade" chip later > >as CPU demand increases. (Trust me, it will..) > > > > Keep in mind that each client IP will take a Windows user > >license if you plan on serving files via sharing. The max > >connections/licenses, if I'm not mistaken, is still 10 for > >non-server versions of Windows. Linux would be a better > >fit all around for a server, but that's my opinion. I > >have 4 Debian boxen and one RHEL box running servers here. > > > >--- > >Glen Batchelor > >IT Director > >All-Spec Industries > >phone: (910) 332-0424 > >fax: (910) 763-5664 > >e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- > 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/
RE: [U2] New UV system
Sorry.. I meant dual-core AMD Opteron for a Windows server, not the X2 64 chips. You can do fine with X2's on an unstressed Linux server. You will want to look at the Opteron 200 series for 2-way setups. The 100 series Opterons are for single-CPU setups. You *can* run one 100 series CPU on a dual-CPU board, but it's not recommended with upgrading in mind. If you plan on upgrading in the near future, you will have to swap the 100 series chip you just bought for a comparable 200. At the same time, you have to buy your second chip. Doing that is much cheaper up-front, but upgrading can become expensive later. --- Glen Batchelor IT Director All-Spec Industries phone: (910) 332-0424 fax: (910) 763-5664 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- www.allspec.com --- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glen Batchelor > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 11:56 AM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: RE: [U2] New UV system > > Cost-wise, consider a dual-core AMD X2 system. If you have a little more > funds, the 5140 or 5150 Xeons are well cached chips for the money. Either > way, get a dual-CPU mainboard that is one-CPU capable so that you can drop > in an "upgrade" chip later as CPU demand increases. (Trust me, it will..) > > Keep in mind that each client IP will take a Windows user license if you > plan on serving files via sharing. The max connections/licenses, if I'm > not > mistaken, is still 10 for non-server versions of Windows. Linux would be a > better fit all around for a server, but that's my opinion. I have 4 Debian > boxen and one RHEL box running servers here. > > --- > Glen Batchelor > IT Director > All-Spec Industries > phone: (910) 332-0424 > fax: (910) 763-5664 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- > www.allspec.com > --- > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MAJ Programming > > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:17 AM > > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > > Subject: [U2] New UV system > > > > All: > > > > I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They > > would > > like to move everything to a contemporary box. > > > > While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which > kind > > of > > W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to > switch > > databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). > > > > Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. > > > > I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the > > backup as > > it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that > > familiar > > with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to > resize > > (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. > > > > I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. > > > > Thanks in advance > > Mark Johnson > > --- > > 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/
RE: [U2] New UV system
Glen: I bought a Dell dual-core AMD Opteron rack-mount server several months ago, to go along with the 18 month old Xeon rack-mount server we purchased. The machine was virtually identical, and cost more by the way. The AMD is twice as loud as the Intel and is most annoying. It's always something, isn't it? :-) Bill >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glen Batchelor >Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 8:56 AM >To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >Subject: RE: [U2] New UV system > > Cost-wise, consider a dual-core AMD X2 system. If you have a >little more funds, the 5140 or 5150 Xeons are well cached chips >for the money. Either way, get a dual-CPU mainboard that is >one-CPU capable so that you can drop in an "upgrade" chip later >as CPU demand increases. (Trust me, it will..) > > Keep in mind that each client IP will take a Windows user >license if you plan on serving files via sharing. The max >connections/licenses, if I'm not mistaken, is still 10 for >non-server versions of Windows. Linux would be a better >fit all around for a server, but that's my opinion. I >have 4 Debian boxen and one RHEL box running servers here. > >--- >Glen Batchelor >IT Director >All-Spec Industries >phone: (910) 332-0424 >fax: (910) 763-5664 >e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] New UV system
Why do you need uvbackup? I'm NOT recommending that you don't use it, but a while ago I had a linux box, a SCO box, and a Windows box, and quite happily copied UV files between all three of them using the OS-level copy command. Bearing in mind they all run on Intel chips, and byte order is a chip problem NOT an OS problem, you shouldn't have problems just copying the os-level directories around. DO play and test before you do anything for live, though! Cheers, Wol -Original Message- From: Manu Fernandes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 June 2007 15:46 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] New UV system Hi, You can run a 5 users of uv on a lite box (I do it on a notebook) Use W2003 server (W2003 is more demanding in ressource like UV, it can run on XP too ). To switch from sco to windows, you must use *uvbackup* tool into sco to prepare a file, then copy these file to windows and use *uvrestore* to restore the datas. (problem with special chars on unix vs windows)) There is a trouble with Type1 file, convert it to Type19 before copy. Under Windows, you must upgrade all your VOC entry where there is OS full path (check your datas eventually) I hope this help. Manu - Original Message - From: "MAJ Programming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 3:17 PM Subject: [U2] New UV system > All: > > I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They > would > like to move everything to a contemporary box. > > While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which kind > of > W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to switch > databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). > > Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. > > I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the > backup as > it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that > familiar > with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to resize > (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. > > I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. > > Thanks in advance > Mark Johnson > --- > 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/
RE: [U2] New UV system
Cost-wise, consider a dual-core AMD X2 system. If you have a little more funds, the 5140 or 5150 Xeons are well cached chips for the money. Either way, get a dual-CPU mainboard that is one-CPU capable so that you can drop in an "upgrade" chip later as CPU demand increases. (Trust me, it will..) Keep in mind that each client IP will take a Windows user license if you plan on serving files via sharing. The max connections/licenses, if I'm not mistaken, is still 10 for non-server versions of Windows. Linux would be a better fit all around for a server, but that's my opinion. I have 4 Debian boxen and one RHEL box running servers here. --- Glen Batchelor IT Director All-Spec Industries phone: (910) 332-0424 fax: (910) 763-5664 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- www.allspec.com --- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MAJ Programming > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:17 AM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: [U2] New UV system > > All: > > I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They > would > like to move everything to a contemporary box. > > While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which kind > of > W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to switch > databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). > > Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. > > I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the > backup as > it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that > familiar > with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to resize > (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. > > I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. > > Thanks in advance > Mark Johnson > --- > 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/
Re: [U2] New UV system
Mark, I'm moving a client to a new server right now. The specs we are using are Dual Core Xeon 5140, 4 GB memory, with Windows 2003. It sounds like you could get away with a much smaller system. I shy away from using desktops as servers, so I'd recommend you go with a rack-mountable if you can. I'm available for phone-based assistance. You can contact me off-list about that. - Chuck MAJ Programming wrote: All: I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They would like to move everything to a contemporary box. While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which kind of W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to switch databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the backup as it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that familiar with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to resize (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. Thanks in advance Mark Johnson --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ -- Charles Barouch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) www.KeyAlly.com (718) 762-3884 x 1 P. O. Box 540957, Queens, NY 11354 --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] New UV system
Seems to me a move to Linux would be better since they are probably more familiar with a nix system. The spoolers are completely different. Whatever way you do decide then you should use uvbackup and uvrestore to move your accounts. It's simple from either the command line or the Uniadmin front end. Read up on it. When the files are restored with uvrestore the magic numbers are corrected and you can automatically resize the files. If the accounts are small enough you can even back them up to files and copy them over to the new system through the network or to a cd/dvd if you have a cd or dvd burner and put it on the new system. If it has to be tape you can uvbackup to the tape. If you have to use cpio or tar then shut down the database before making the copies. If you copy using windows then use the dos xcopy because the windows copy will not copy some of the files. - Original Message - From: "MAJ Programming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 8:17 AM Subject: [U2] New UV system All: I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They would like to move everything to a contemporary box. While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which kind of W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to switch databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the backup as it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that familiar with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to resize (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. Thanks in advance Mark Johnson --- 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/
Re: [U2] New UV system
Hi, You can run a 5 users of uv on a lite box (I do it on a notebook) Use W2003 server (W2003 is more demanding in ressource like UV, it can run on XP too ). To switch from sco to windows, you must use *uvbackup* tool into sco to prepare a file, then copy these file to windows and use *uvrestore* to restore the datas. (problem with special chars on unix vs windows)) There is a trouble with Type1 file, convert it to Type19 before copy. Under Windows, you must upgrade all your VOC entry where there is OS full path (check your datas eventually) I hope this help. Manu - Original Message - From: "MAJ Programming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 3:17 PM Subject: [U2] New UV system All: I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They would like to move everything to a contemporary box. While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which kind of W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to switch databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the backup as it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that familiar with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to resize (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. Thanks in advance Mark Johnson --- 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/
Re: [U2] New UV system
Mark, We just went through a conversion from a UV box and can help you if you haven't already been overwhelmed by responses. Contact me at 919 567-0042 or at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Will American Computer Technics, Inc. MAJ Programming wrote: All: I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They would like to move everything to a contemporary box. While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which kind of W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to switch databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the backup as it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that familiar with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to resize (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. Thanks in advance Mark Johnson --- 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] Re: wIntegrate V6 break key woes
Ok, I'm going to reply to my own post here. :-) I figured out what the problem was. On the Setup | Communications | Windows Socket setup screen Telnet tab there's a "Break Signal" and that was set to "Break". After changing this setting to "Interrupt", my defined break key is working fine. On 6/13/07, Andy Pflueger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, Recently, I have installed wIntegrate Version 6.0.4 on my WinXP Pro machine for evaluation use. So far, I really like its enhanced features but have noticed one difference between the previous version which I had loaded. My defined break key is reacting differently. Always before I could use Ctrl-Pause/Break to break a program to the debugger. Now, with the new 6.0.4 version, neither Ctrl-C or Ctrl-Pause/Break will break a program to invoke the debugger. Moreover, the Ctrl-Pause/Break will abort the connection with the server altogether. Has anybody seen or encountered this issue before and how can I change the behavior of the Ctrl-Pause/Break to NOT close the host connection but instead just break the program for the debugger? --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] wIntegrate V6 break key woes
I did get Crtl-C to work. But it took some experimenting. So I am not sure that I know all the steps that I did to get it working. I gave someone else the settings that I had and they say it still does not work. The setting that finally allowed me to use Crtl-C was to go into Setup, Keyboard and define my break key as Crtl-A. When I am in Unidata and press Crtl-A, I end up at UNIX. But Crtl-C does now get me into the Unidata debugger. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andy Pflueger Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:26 AM To: U2 User Group Mailing List Subject: [U2] wIntegrate V6 break key woes Hello, Recently, I have installed wIntegrate Version 6.0.4 on my WinXP Pro machine for evaluation use. So far, I really like its enhanced features but have noticed one difference between the previous version which I had loaded. My defined break key is reacting differently. Always before I could use Ctrl-Pause/Break to break a program to the debugger. Now, with the new 6.0.4 version, neither Ctrl-C or Ctrl-Pause/Break will break a program to invoke the debugger. Moreover, the Ctrl-Pause/Break will abort the connection with the server altogether. Has anybody seen or encountered this issue before and how can I change the behavior of the Ctrl-Pause/Break to NOT close the host connection but instead just break the program for the debugger? Thanks in advance, Andy Pflueger Ivy Hill Corporation Louisville, KY Unidata 7.1.0 Solaris 8/9 wIntegrate 6.0.4 --- 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] New UV system
All: I have a client running UV on SCO on a 486/Pentium-1 looking box. They would like to move everything to a contemporary box. While I don't create systems, I would like some suggestions on which kind of W2000-class server to hold a 5 user version of UV. I don't want to switch databases to UD or D3 etc as the $ isn't there for the conversion (me). Unless absolutely imperative, I do not want a unix-based system. I would also be in the market for some phone-based assistance on the backup as it's done through an automated process in the UV app and I'm not that familiar with UV/UD backups or restores. One thing I would like would be to resize (down) most of the data files. I think it is a dds4 tape. I'm even game for a gently-used smaller system. Thanks in advance Mark Johnson --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
[U2] wIntegrate V6 break key woes
Hello, Recently, I have installed wIntegrate Version 6.0.4 on my WinXP Pro machine for evaluation use. So far, I really like its enhanced features but have noticed one difference between the previous version which I had loaded. My defined break key is reacting differently. Always before I could use Ctrl-Pause/Break to break a program to the debugger. Now, with the new 6.0.4 version, neither Ctrl-C or Ctrl-Pause/Break will break a program to invoke the debugger. Moreover, the Ctrl-Pause/Break will abort the connection with the server altogether. Has anybody seen or encountered this issue before and how can I change the behavior of the Ctrl-Pause/Break to NOT close the host connection but instead just break the program for the debugger? Thanks in advance, Andy Pflueger Ivy Hill Corporation Louisville, KY Unidata 7.1.0 Solaris 8/9 wIntegrate 6.0.4 --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] RedBack Garbage Collection
Thanks for the info; I had not heard this one before. All of the apps that I have written so far are quite small-scale and, although I do use session variables, I don't think they are affected by the conditions that you mentioned. However, we all know what will happen if I make the ASSumption that they will STAY small-scale; so I have to ask for my future work: What methodology do you use in place of session variables? John B. -Original Message- ... The problem is IIS itself: IIS Session Variables are thread-locked to the specific IIS thread on which they were instantiated. ... --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
