Re: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET
Regarding "the patch". With the original release of UniObjects.net there was a significant performance issue. A different release or "patch" was given limited release in November of 2004. This "patch" fixed all the performance issues. My problem was that my var did not or was not able to get a reference to this "patch" from IBM. Subsequent releases of UniVerse after November of 2004 probably (I would hope) include the performant (yes it's a word, they said so here on this forum!) version. For me, I ended up downloading "the patch" from a web site in South Africa. That web site was with a var who obviously had a leg up technically from the one I'm used to dealing with Hope that clears up any confusion regarding "the patch". --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET
Nick, (This maybe double post...) We use .NET and UniObjects on HP-UX with Universe. The access time is close to zero. All of our processes use "Call Subroutines". Opening files and doing things manually on .NET side will take forever. At times we have about 10 to 20 thousand students access our site for ordering books and we have had no problem yet. https://caesar.aztecshops.com/azshop/tbDefault.aspx We also have wireless devices use web services provided by .NET (using UniOjbects). That process is a little slow, but the problem is the web services and the fact that everything is running on wireless-B network. Web server is IIS 6 on W2K3 web edition. Universe is on HP-UX running Universe. Connectivity is GB network with firewall. I'm not aware of any patch release for UniOjbects. Hope this helped. -- Jahan K. Jamshidi MIS Director Aztec Shops LTD San Diego State University 619.594.7492 -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 2:52 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET Nick, We do something similar, have a look at COM+ object pooling (google/msdn). You can start up a configurable number of sessions (setting common) and call them from managed classes as required. When processing is quiescent for a set period of time, the sessions will close. We're using this method to provide connectivity between our ASPX and BizTalk services back to UV. We don't have any patches (that I know of on uodotnet) and throughput is adequate (At least bettering the previous homebaked UV to UV socket transfer service we were previously running for speed, manageability and reliability). We have a "ping" process which returns a time from an initial ASPX call, opening or "activating" a session and calling a UV subroutine to the final genration of the response message. The first time takes 3-5 seconds, after that around 300ms. Also, I believe a future release of U2 will have support for session pooling built in. Regards, Stuart -Original Message- From: "Nick Cipollina" > The reason that our current processes are so fast is that we read as > much common data as humanly possible into memory at start-up so there is > little overhead while the process is running. If I have to call a > subroutine from .NET, that would actually slow processing down. I need > to get the data into .NET's memory to do something similar. ** This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of addressed recipient(s). If you have received this email in error please notify the Spotless IS Support Centre (+61 3 9269 7555) immediately, who will advise further action. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been scanned for the presence of computer related viruses. ** --- 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][UV] Universe and .NET
Nick, We do something similar, have a look at COM+ object pooling (google/msdn). You can start up a configurable number of sessions (setting common) and call them from managed classes as required. When processing is quiescent for a set period of time, the sessions will close. We're using this method to provide connectivity between our ASPX and BizTalk services back to UV. We don't have any patches (that I know of on uodotnet) and throughput is adequate (At least bettering the previous homebaked UV to UV socket transfer service we were previously running for speed, manageability and reliability). We have a "ping" process which returns a time from an initial ASPX call, opening or "activating" a session and calling a UV subroutine to the final genration of the response message. The first time takes 3-5 seconds, after that around 300ms. Also, I believe a future release of U2 will have support for session pooling built in. Regards, Stuart -Original Message- From: "Nick Cipollina" > The reason that our current processes are so fast is that we read as > much common data as humanly possible into memory at start-up so there is > little overhead while the process is running. If I have to call a > subroutine from .NET, that would actually slow processing down. I need > to get the data into .NET's memory to do something similar. ** This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of addressed recipient(s). If you have received this email in error please notify the Spotless IS Support Centre (+61 3 9269 7555) immediately, who will advise further action. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been scanned for the presence of computer related viruses. ** --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET
Load the patch, all will be well. I would however suggest using a subroutine for those chores that can be done quicker on the server. I don't think that uv.net is really meant as a replacement for UniBasic on the backend. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET
You don't need to incur the network traffic issues of pulling all of your data from the DBMS server into another remote system. mv.NET is a thin transport that will execute your BASIC program as fast as it can run to generate your data, so that part incurs virtually no overhead. You can probably use the exact same BASIC program you have to generate your data, but data must be saved in Named Common, since mv.NET won't share common variable space with your apps. From then on, any process that hits that same port will have access to your common, just like it works now. However... In a multi-user environment you may have multiple users hitting a single port at different times. If you do not want this form of contention then you must set a profile so that each user only uses a single login session, just like we do with telnet. If you allow users to share a pool of ports then you can't guarantee that one user will leave and come back in on the same port. This also applies to persistent locking and transaction bracketing. To make data more readily available to multiple clients, you can read data into a middle-tier so that you don't need to hit the server all the time. All clients can access that pool of data, or you can pull data into individual clients. Your .NET code would need to be written to generate the data (simply call the prog as above), pull it into these tiers, and then your client-side data access would need to be able to figure out where to go for data - client, middle-tier, or DBMS. This can actually be handled through some layer of abstraction so that the client doesn't really know where data comes from, the data is just "there". As a distributor for mv.NET I'll be happy to provide more details off-list and even set you up as a reseller. Our value-add offering includes all levels of .NET training, close product support, and assistance with development, sales, and marketing. HTH, Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ removethisNebula-RnD.com http://www.bluefinity.com/nebula.html Nick Cipollina wrote: > The reason that our current processes are so fast is that > we read as much common data as humanly possible into > memory at start-up so there is little overhead while the > process is running. If I have to call a subroutine from > .NET, that would actually slow processing down. I need > to get the data into .NET's memory to do something > similar. > > What about some of the other .NET options, such as > MV.NET? Any thoughts on those? > wrote: > solution that might provide us with similar performance? > I've seen some talk on this list of some of the other > solutions such as MV.NET, but I don't recall seeing any > metrics provided with any of these discussions. Any > feedback would be appreciated. Thanks. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET
The reason that our current processes are so fast is that we read as much common data as humanly possible into memory at start-up so there is little overhead while the process is running. If I have to call a subroutine from .NET, that would actually slow processing down. I need to get the data into .NET's memory to do something similar. What about some of the other .NET options, such as MV.NET? Any thoughts on those? Thanks, Nick Cipollina -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gerry-u2ug Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:23 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET my guess is that if you are running into performance issues using uo.net then you are trying to do everything via uo.net. you should be using uo.net to invoke universe routines to do most if not ALL of your processing. this way the performance should be virtually identical to native ( as it is in fact native ) the only overhead is the actuall call itself. Gerry -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nick Cipollina Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 08:24 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET Hello all, I need some advice on Universe and .NET. We would like to begin using .NET as our front-end with Universe as our back-end. We have started to explore UO.NET, but it does not seem to provide us with the performance we will require. Our processes are currently written in PICK BASIC and we are processing transactions in sub-50 milliseconds. Does anyone have a suggestion for a .NET solution that might provide us with similar performance? I've seen some talk on this list of some of the other solutions such as MV.NET, but I don't recall seeing any metrics provided with any of these discussions. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks. Nick Cipollina Pick Programmer ACS - Heritage Information Systems, Inc. 2810 North Parham Road, Suite 210 Richmond, VA 23294 (804)644-8707 x 314 --- 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][UV] Universe and .NET
> Do you need "the patch" on Unidata 7.1 and > if so where do you get it. I don't know that I have "the patch" and we're on 6.0.3 .. So same question - where do you get it .. -Chuck --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET
Do you need "the patch" on Unidata 7.1 and if so where do you get it. thanks George R Smith -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Kibbey Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 8:11 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET Make sure you have "the patch". Without it, uo.net is hopelessly slow. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET
my guess is that if you are running into performance issues using uo.net then you are trying to do everything via uo.net. you should be using uo.net to invoke universe routines to do most if not ALL of your processing. this way the performance should be virtually identical to native ( as it is in fact native ) the only overhead is the actuall call itself. Gerry -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nick Cipollina Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 08:24 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2][UV] Universe and .NET Hello all, I need some advice on Universe and .NET. We would like to begin using .NET as our front-end with Universe as our back-end. We have started to explore UO.NET, but it does not seem to provide us with the performance we will require. Our processes are currently written in PICK BASIC and we are processing transactions in sub-50 milliseconds. Does anyone have a suggestion for a .NET solution that might provide us with similar performance? I've seen some talk on this list of some of the other solutions such as MV.NET, but I don't recall seeing any metrics provided with any of these discussions. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks. Nick Cipollina Pick Programmer ACS - Heritage Information Systems, Inc. 2810 North Parham Road, Suite 210 Richmond, VA 23294 (804)644-8707 x 314 --- 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][UV] Universe and .NET
Make sure you have "the patch". Without it, uo.net is hopelessly slow. On 9/27/05, Nick Cipollina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello all, > > > > I need some advice on Universe and .NET. We would like to begin using > .NET as our front-end with Universe as our back-end. We have started to > explore UO.NET, but it does not seem to provide us with the performance > we will require. Our processes are currently written in PICK BASIC and > we are processing transactions in sub-50 milliseconds. Does anyone have > a suggestion for a .NET solution that might provide us with similar > performance? I've seen some talk on this list of some of the other > solutions such as MV.NET, but I don't recall seeing any metrics provided > with any of these discussions. Any feedback would be appreciated. > Thanks. > > > > Nick Cipollina > > > > Pick Programmer > > ACS - Heritage Information Systems, Inc. > > 2810 North Parham Road, Suite 210 > > Richmond, VA 23294 > > (804)644-8707 x 314 > --- > 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/
