Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Since I was under the impression that UniObjects is still supported, am also interested in the response to this. jim.sto...@esc.edu wrote in message news:of751a420f.4c7bb679-on85257965.0075e4a7-85257965.00761...@esc.edu... Hi Dan, Thanks for this information. Can you tell us if Rocket has any plans to further develop / support the original COM/OLE version of UniObjects? And in particular, are there any plans to release a 64 bit version? Thank you, Jim Stoner SUNY Empire State College From: Daniel McGrath dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: 12/07/2011 05:00 PM Subject:Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org I missed this email. Q: Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? A: Yes. There are no plans on changing this answer in the foreseeable future either. Regards, Dan McGrath U2 Product Manager Rocket Software Web: www.rocketsoftware.com/u2 -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [ mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 10:22 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Great information John and Robert. Looks like UOJ is getting mature. In my situation, it is attractive since we use Domino and Unidata extensively. But, I do not want to invest my time in something that won't be supported in the future. My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? Thanks. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Robert said: Hi John, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:01 AM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. The above has caused me many problems in both web applications and running UOJ on mobile devices. I got a debugger out and went through what is happening, it appears UOJ is using deprecated routines within java and writing invalid data to the udcs server. The deprecated routines are using the systems character encoding to convert 16bit java characters to 8bit bytes. As the host systems character encoding is variable thus different data will be sent to the server depending on what location and operating system is used. Roughly the uniobjects conversion routines grab the java system property file.encoding which is meant for reading and writing files and use it directly and indirectly to write data to the socket. Quick fix is on the java command line -Dfile.encoding=iso8859_1 Warning: once java program is running ie System.setProperty(file.encoding,iso8859_1) does not work as a bunch of system level stuff is cached on startup. The above quick fix has many bad side effects as the java process now has the wrong character encoding to read and write files on the local system and has caused me issues in third party libraries which expect to be able to read and write files correctly. ie my web server should be emitting utf8 for maximum compatibility but is putting out iso8859_1 for most files thanks to this quick fix It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html ___ 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 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of GPM Development Ltd. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient ,you are not authorized
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Hi Jim, As with most things, if you have specific developments (such as 64 bit) you need, it is best to email U2AskUs along with your specific requirements on why you need it so that we can properly consider it and start the conversation with Engineering. As far as I can see, no one has asked us for a 64 bit version so far. Regards, Dan McGrath U2 Product Manager Rocket Software -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of jim.sto...@esc.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 2:30 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Hi Dan, Thanks for this information. Can you tell us if Rocket has any plans to further develop / support the original COM/OLE version of UniObjects? And in particular, are there any plans to release a 64 bit version? Thank you, Jim Stoner SUNY Empire State College From: Daniel McGrath dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: 12/07/2011 05:00 PM Subject:Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org I missed this email. Q: Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? A: Yes. There are no plans on changing this answer in the foreseeable future either. Regards, Dan McGrath U2 Product Manager Rocket Software Web: www.rocketsoftware.com/u2 -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [ mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 10:22 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Great information John and Robert. Looks like UOJ is getting mature. In my situation, it is attractive since we use Domino and Unidata extensively. But, I do not want to invest my time in something that won't be supported in the future. My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? Thanks. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Robert said: Hi John, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:01 AM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. The above has caused me many problems in both web applications and running UOJ on mobile devices. I got a debugger out and went through what is happening, it appears UOJ is using deprecated routines within java and writing invalid data to the udcs server. The deprecated routines are using the systems character encoding to convert 16bit java characters to 8bit bytes. As the host systems character encoding is variable thus different data will be sent to the server depending on what location and operating system is used. Roughly the uniobjects conversion routines grab the java system property file.encoding which is meant for reading and writing files and use it directly and indirectly to write data to the socket. Quick fix is on the java command line -Dfile.encoding=iso8859_1 Warning: once java program is running ie System.setProperty(file.encoding,iso8859_1) does not work as a bunch of system level stuff is cached on startup. The above quick fix has many bad side effects as the java process now has the wrong character encoding to read and write files on the local system and has caused me issues in third party libraries which expect to be able to read and write files correctly. ie my web server should be emitting utf8 for maximum compatibility but is putting out iso8859_1 for most files thanks to this quick fix It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html ___ 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 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
I've used both. There are syntax differences, especially with the UO,NET since it adheres to the CLR. Both libraries did what I needed. I don't know if UO,NET is a better solution, but it looks to me like it has been kept up-to-date better. I am interested in UOJ because of new capabilities in Domino. The 64-bit issue is going to become important. I guess my real question isn't just whether UOJ will continue to be supported, but will it be kept up with new technologies. Hi, If Rocket is not going to be updating / supporting the original UniObjects, we're looking at either creating a wrapper for UO.net, or using UOJ. UOJ is the obvious choice for us, since we're currently Domino-based, and Domino supports Java agents. However, I have the impression UO.net may be the better product. Are there any users on the list who have experience with both UOJ and UO.net? If so, would you be willing to share a quick assessment of their comparative value / quality? From looking through the manuals, it seems to me like UO.net has slightly more functionality out of the box, such as the native implementation of a data set class. Is that a valid assessment? And how do they compare in terms of quality? For example, the recent thread was going through issues with UOJ's character encoding. Are there similar (or worse) gotchas in UO.net? Thanks for any insights you care to share! Jim Stoner Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Hi Dan, Thanks for this information. Can you tell us if Rocket has any plans to further develop / support the original COM/OLE version of UniObjects? And in particular, are there any plans to release a 64 bit version? Thank you, Jim Stoner SUNY Empire State College From: Daniel McGrath dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: 12/07/2011 05:00 PM Subject:Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org I missed this email. Q: Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? A: Yes. There are no plans on changing this answer in the foreseeable future either. Regards, Dan McGrath U2 Product Manager Rocket Software Web: www.rocketsoftware.com/u2 -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [ mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 10:22 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Great information John and Robert. Looks like UOJ is getting mature. In my situation, it is attractive since we use Domino and Unidata extensively. But, I do not want to invest my time in something that won't be supported in the future. My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? Thanks. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Robert said: Hi John, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:01 AM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. The above has caused me many problems in both web applications and running UOJ on mobile devices. I got a debugger out and went through what is happening, it appears UOJ is using deprecated routines within java and writing invalid data to the udcs server. The deprecated routines are using the systems character encoding to convert 16bit java characters to 8bit bytes. As the host systems character encoding is variable thus different data will be sent to the server depending on what location and operating system is used. Roughly the uniobjects conversion routines grab the java system property file.encoding which is meant for reading and writing files and use it directly and indirectly to write data to the socket. Quick fix is on the java command line -Dfile.encoding=iso8859_1 Warning: once java program is running ie System.setProperty(file.encoding,iso8859_1) does not work as a bunch of system level stuff is cached on startup. The above quick fix has many bad side effects as the java process now has the wrong character encoding to read and write files on the local system and has caused me issues in third party libraries which expect to be able to read and write files correctly. ie my web server should be emitting utf8 for maximum compatibility but is putting out iso8859_1 for most files thanks to this quick fix It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html ___ 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 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Hi, If Rocket is not going to be updating / supporting the original UniObjects, we're looking at either creating a wrapper for UO.net, or using UOJ. UOJ is the obvious choice for us, since we're currently Domino-based, and Domino supports Java agents. However, I have the impression UO.net may be the better product. Are there any users on the list who have experience with both UOJ and UO.net? If so, would you be willing to share a quick assessment of their comparative value / quality? From looking through the manuals, it seems to me like UO.net has slightly more functionality out of the box, such as the native implementation of a data set class. Is that a valid assessment? And how do they compare in terms of quality? For example, the recent thread was going through issues with UOJ's character encoding. Are there similar (or worse) gotchas in UO.net? Thanks for any insights you care to share! Jim Stoner From: Symeon Breen syme...@gmail.com To: 'U2 Users List' u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: 12/07/2011 01:18 PM Subject:Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org Considering UOJ and UO.net are the only api's available for u2 I would have thought yes -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com Sent: 07 December 2011 17:22 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Great information John and Robert. Looks like UOJ is getting mature. In my situation, it is attractive since we use Domino and Unidata extensively. But, I do not want to invest my time in something that won't be supported in the future. My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? Thanks. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Robert said: Hi John, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:01 AM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. The above has caused me many problems in both web applications and running UOJ on mobile devices. I got a debugger out and went through what is happening, it appears UOJ is using deprecated routines within java and writing invalid data to the udcs server. The deprecated routines are using the systems character encoding to convert 16bit java characters to 8bit bytes. As the host systems character encoding is variable thus different data will be sent to the server depending on what location and operating system is used. Roughly the uniobjects conversion routines grab the java system property file.encoding which is meant for reading and writing files and use it directly and indirectly to write data to the socket. Quick fix is on the java command line -Dfile.encoding=iso8859_1 Warning: once java program is running ie System.setProperty(file.encoding,iso8859_1) does not work as a bunch of system level stuff is cached on startup. The above quick fix has many bad side effects as the java process now has the wrong character encoding to read and write files on the local system and has caused me issues in third party libraries which expect to be able to read and write files correctly. ie my web server should be emitting utf8 for maximum compatibility but is putting out iso8859_1 for most files thanks to this quick fix It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html ___ 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: 10.0.1415 / Virus Database: 2102/4064 - Release Date: 12/06/11 ___ 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
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
I only have experience with UOJ, so I can't offer any comparison, but I'd suggest the extensiveness of the feature set of each API may be a moot point depending on how you use them. For example, I've never attempted to use UOJ to do anything that can be done locally by a UniBASIC subroutine. The only UOJ features I make use of are UniDynArray objects and the ability to call UV subroutines. I've never had a compelling reason to use any of the other UOJ functionality. -John -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of jim.sto...@esc.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:40 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Hi, If Rocket is not going to be updating / supporting the original UniObjects, we're looking at either creating a wrapper for UO.net, or using UOJ. UOJ is the obvious choice for us, since we're currently Domino-based, and Domino supports Java agents. However, I have the impression UO.net may be the better product. Are there any users on the list who have experience with both UOJ and UO.net? If so, would you be willing to share a quick assessment of their comparative value / quality? From looking through the manuals, it seems to me like UO.net has slightly more functionality out of the box, such as the native implementation of a data set class. Is that a valid assessment? And how do they compare in terms of quality? For example, the recent thread was going through issues with UOJ's character encoding. Are there similar (or worse) gotchas in UO.net? Thanks for any insights you care to share! Jim Stoner ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Same here with uo.net - call a sub, let it pass back a dynamic array, or a json string or an xml string, close the connection, do the rest in .net. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of John Hester Sent: 14 December 2011 00:21 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 I only have experience with UOJ, so I can't offer any comparison, but I'd suggest the extensiveness of the feature set of each API may be a moot point depending on how you use them. For example, I've never attempted to use UOJ to do anything that can be done locally by a UniBASIC subroutine. The only UOJ features I make use of are UniDynArray objects and the ability to call UV subroutines. I've never had a compelling reason to use any of the other UOJ functionality. -John -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of jim.sto...@esc.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:40 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Hi, If Rocket is not going to be updating / supporting the original UniObjects, we're looking at either creating a wrapper for UO.net, or using UOJ. UOJ is the obvious choice for us, since we're currently Domino-based, and Domino supports Java agents. However, I have the impression UO.net may be the better product. Are there any users on the list who have experience with both UOJ and UO.net? If so, would you be willing to share a quick assessment of their comparative value / quality? From looking through the manuals, it seems to me like UO.net has slightly more functionality out of the box, such as the native implementation of a data set class. Is that a valid assessment? And how do they compare in terms of quality? For example, the recent thread was going through issues with UOJ's character encoding. Are there similar (or worse) gotchas in UO.net? Thanks for any insights you care to share! Jim Stoner ___ 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: 10.0.1415 / Virus Database: 2102/4078 - Release Date: 12/13/11 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
It was confirmed that UOJ isn't going away, which is good for legacy development. But my whole point was that for new development we don't need it, never did. From: Charles_Shaffer Tony, What you say is true, and those tools would be great in the right situation. But I am concerned about the future of UOJ. My understanding is that the new Domino will allow jars to be directly accessed from the Domino Designer. Just want to make sure that UOJ is not going to be deprecated. Tony said: There's no good reason for that condition to exist. Rocket doesn't necessarily need to be the sole provider of language bindings into the platform. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Tony It was confirmed that UOJ isn't going away, which is good for legacy development. But my whole point was that for new development we don't need it, never did. Maybe I am asking the wrong question. Is there a better way to interface Domino 8.5 to Unidata than UOJ? Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation From: Tony Gravagno 3xk547...@sneakemail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org, Date: 12/08/2011 03:32 PM Subject:Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org It was confirmed that UOJ isn't going away, which is good for legacy development. But my whole point was that for new development we don't need it, never did. From: Charles_Shaffer Tony, What you say is true, and those tools would be great in the right situation. But I am concerned about the future of UOJ. My understanding is that the new Domino will allow jars to be directly accessed from the Domino Designer. Just want to make sure that UOJ is not going to be deprecated. Tony said: There's no good reason for that condition to exist. Rocket doesn't necessarily need to be the sole provider of language bindings into the platform. ___ 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
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
From: Charles_Shaffer Maybe I am asking the wrong question. Is there a better way to interface Domino 8.5 to Unidata than UOJ? IMO, UOJ probably is the best way. In the absence of anything approaching a IBM Domino Connector for U2, I'm thinking ODBC via Easysoft might be the only other option. (I wasn't reading any Domino-centric posts to this thread, only the UOJ posts, so maybe I missed something.) ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Great information John and Robert. Looks like UOJ is getting mature. In my situation, it is attractive since we use Domino and Unidata extensively. But, I do not want to invest my time in something that won't be supported in the future. My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? Thanks. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Robert said: Hi John, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:01 AM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. The above has caused me many problems in both web applications and running UOJ on mobile devices. I got a debugger out and went through what is happening, it appears UOJ is using deprecated routines within java and writing invalid data to the udcs server. The deprecated routines are using the systems character encoding to convert 16bit java characters to 8bit bytes. As the host systems character encoding is variable thus different data will be sent to the server depending on what location and operating system is used. Roughly the uniobjects conversion routines grab the java system property file.encoding which is meant for reading and writing files and use it directly and indirectly to write data to the socket. Quick fix is on the java command line -Dfile.encoding=iso8859_1 Warning: once java program is running ie System.setProperty(file.encoding,iso8859_1) does not work as a bunch of system level stuff is cached on startup. The above quick fix has many bad side effects as the java process now has the wrong character encoding to read and write files on the local system and has caused me issues in third party libraries which expect to be able to read and write files correctly. ie my web server should be emitting utf8 for maximum compatibility but is putting out iso8859_1 for most files thanks to this quick fix It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Considering UOJ and UO.net are the only api's available for u2 I would have thought yes -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com Sent: 07 December 2011 17:22 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Great information John and Robert. Looks like UOJ is getting mature. In my situation, it is attractive since we use Domino and Unidata extensively. But, I do not want to invest my time in something that won't be supported in the future. My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? Thanks. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Robert said: Hi John, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:01 AM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. The above has caused me many problems in both web applications and running UOJ on mobile devices. I got a debugger out and went through what is happening, it appears UOJ is using deprecated routines within java and writing invalid data to the udcs server. The deprecated routines are using the systems character encoding to convert 16bit java characters to 8bit bytes. As the host systems character encoding is variable thus different data will be sent to the server depending on what location and operating system is used. Roughly the uniobjects conversion routines grab the java system property file.encoding which is meant for reading and writing files and use it directly and indirectly to write data to the socket. Quick fix is on the java command line -Dfile.encoding=iso8859_1 Warning: once java program is running ie System.setProperty(file.encoding,iso8859_1) does not work as a bunch of system level stuff is cached on startup. The above quick fix has many bad side effects as the java process now has the wrong character encoding to read and write files on the local system and has caused me issues in third party libraries which expect to be able to read and write files correctly. ie my web server should be emitting utf8 for maximum compatibility but is putting out iso8859_1 for most files thanks to this quick fix It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html ___ 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: 10.0.1415 / Virus Database: 2102/4064 - Release Date: 12/06/11 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
I would be very interested in hearing Rocket's answer to that question also because a significant portion of our infrastructure currently relies on UOJ. They do tout is as a key feature of UV on their web site: http://www.rocketsoftware.com/u2/products/universe From the link: UniVerse supports numerous Java-based interfaces as well, including JBDC for standards-based connectivity and our own UniObjects for Java high speed native interface. Leverage powerful Java programming tools including the Eclipse framework to enable powerful, platform-independent solutions. -John -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 9:22 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Great information John and Robert. Looks like UOJ is getting mature. In my situation, it is attractive since we use Domino and Unidata extensively. But, I do not want to invest my time in something that won't be supported in the future. My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? Thanks. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
From: Charles Shaffer My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? From: Symeon Breen Considering UOJ and UO.net are the only api's available for u2 I would have thought yes There's no good reason for that condition to exist. Rocket doesn't necessarily need to be the sole provider of language bindings into the platform. A new API can be wrapped around a lower-level interface, and any language binding can then implement that API. So in a short period of time we could have a new Java SDK for U2, PHP for U2, Ruby for U2... A number of people in this community could initiate this over a weekend. But there's little motivation for any of us to do so. Few companies would buy it. If it's FOSS, as it usually happens, few would contribute, but a lot of people would report issues, request new functionality, criticize the documentation, and eventually burn out anyone volunteering effort. The net result, as with many things that are possible with the platform, is that if it doesn't come from the DBMS provider then this commmunity simply does without. Of course we have UOJ and UO.NET, but as discussed here, when these interfaces have issues, there's only one place to go for solutions, and sometimes that's just not good enough or fast enough. Just sayin... T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
I missed this email. Q: Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? A: Yes. There are no plans on changing this answer in the foreseeable future either. Regards, Dan McGrath U2 Product Manager Rocket Software Web: www.rocketsoftware.com/u2 -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 10:22 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Great information John and Robert. Looks like UOJ is getting mature. In my situation, it is attractive since we use Domino and Unidata extensively. But, I do not want to invest my time in something that won't be supported in the future. My question for Rocket is Will UOJ be further developed and supported by Rocket in the future? Thanks. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation Robert said: Hi John, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:01 AM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. The above has caused me many problems in both web applications and running UOJ on mobile devices. I got a debugger out and went through what is happening, it appears UOJ is using deprecated routines within java and writing invalid data to the udcs server. The deprecated routines are using the systems character encoding to convert 16bit java characters to 8bit bytes. As the host systems character encoding is variable thus different data will be sent to the server depending on what location and operating system is used. Roughly the uniobjects conversion routines grab the java system property file.encoding which is meant for reading and writing files and use it directly and indirectly to write data to the socket. Quick fix is on the java command line -Dfile.encoding=iso8859_1 Warning: once java program is running ie System.setProperty(file.encoding,iso8859_1) does not work as a bunch of system level stuff is cached on startup. The above quick fix has many bad side effects as the java process now has the wrong character encoding to read and write files on the local system and has caused me issues in third party libraries which expect to be able to read and write files correctly. ie my web server should be emitting utf8 for maximum compatibility but is putting out iso8859_1 for most files thanks to this quick fix It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html ___ 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
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Tony, What you say is true, and those tools would be great in the right situation. But I am concerned about the future of UOJ. My understanding is that the new Domino will allow jars to be directly accessed from the Domino Designer. Just want to make sure that UOJ is not going to be deprecated. Tony said: There's no good reason for that condition to exist. Rocket doesn't necessarily need to be the sole provider of language bindings into the platform. A new API can be wrapped around a lower-level interface, and any language binding can then implement that API. So in a short period of time we could have a new Java SDK for U2, PHP for U2, Ruby for U2... A number of people in this community could initiate this over a weekend. But there's little motivation for any of us to do so. Few companies would buy it. If it's FOSS, as it usually happens, few would contribute, but a lot of people would report issues, request new functionality, criticize the documentation, and eventually burn out anyone volunteering effort. The net result, as with many things that are possible with the platform, is that if it doesn't come from the DBMS provider then this commmunity simply does without. Of course we have UOJ and UO.NET, but as discussed here, when these interfaces have issues, there's only one place to go for solutions, and sometimes that's just not good enough or fast enough. Just sayin... T Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Hello,
Ok created a quick test routine to show problem(attached to end of
post). It simply gets a record from the demo database and dumps the
output, first the the system default character encoding, then setting
file.encoding and finally clientencoding:
$ echo $LANG
en_US.UTF-8
$ java -classpath asjava.zip:. CharacterEncodingTest
Otis\65533AscProf\6553325800\65533FA\65533PY100\65533221345665\65533414446545\65533Eades
$ java -Dfile.encoding=ISO8859_1 -classpath asjava.zip:. CharacterEncodingTest
Otis\254AscProf\25425800\254FA\254PY100\254221345665\253414446545\254Eades
$ java -Dclientencoding=ISO8859_1 -classpath asjava.zip:. CharacterEncodingTest
Otis\254AscProf\25425800\254FA\254PY100\254221345665\253414446545\254Eades
So setting clientencoding seems to work, providing same output as
file.encoding.
As can see above because system is UTF8 the delimiter characters come
through incorrectly. The same occurs for other binary data outside
the ascii range. On windows for binary data amusingly you even get
different results depending on whether you run the program from the
GUI or console as 2 different character sets are used by the operating
system(for backwards compatability i guess).
Looking at the UniRPC class in UOJ it loads the character encoding
statically thus must specify either file.encoding or
clientencoding on the java command line to reliably ensure UOJ
works. Trying System.setProperty(...) within the java program may or
may not work depending on whether the UniRPC class has already been
loaded by the java classloader.
Would recommend using clientencoding define over file.encoding or
LANG settings both of which will interfere with the reading and
writing of operating systems files by the application.
- Robert
CharacterEncodingTest.java
import asjava.uniclientlibs.*;
import asjava.uniobjects.*;
public class CharacterEncodingTest {
public static final void main(String[] args) {
try {
UniJava dataSource = new UniJava();
UniSession session = dataSource.openSession();
session.setHostName(localhost);
session.setUserName(myuser);
session.setPassword(XX);
session.setAccountPath(demo);
session.setConnectionString(udcs);
session.connect();
UniFile file = session.open(STAFF);
UniString rec = file.read(2);
char[] arr = rec.toCharArray();
StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
for (int i =0; i arr.length; i++) {
if (arr[i] 31 arr[i] 128) {
sb.append(arr[i]);
} else {
sb.append(\\ + (int)arr[i]);
}
}
System.out.println(sb.toString());
file.close();
} catch (UniFileException ufe) {
ufe.printStackTrace(System.err);
} catch (UniSessionException use) {
use.printStackTrace(System.err);
}
}
}
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Hi John, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:01 AM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. The above has caused me many problems in both web applications and running UOJ on mobile devices. I got a debugger out and went through what is happening, it appears UOJ is using deprecated routines within java and writing invalid data to the udcs server. The deprecated routines are using the systems character encoding to convert 16bit java characters to 8bit bytes. As the host systems character encoding is variable thus different data will be sent to the server depending on what location and operating system is used. Roughly the uniobjects conversion routines grab the java system property file.encoding which is meant for reading and writing files and use it directly and indirectly to write data to the socket. Quick fix is on the java command line -Dfile.encoding=iso8859_1 Warning: once java program is running ie System.setProperty(file.encoding,iso8859_1) does not work as a bunch of system level stuff is cached on startup. The above quick fix has many bad side effects as the java process now has the wrong character encoding to read and write files on the local system and has caused me issues in third party libraries which expect to be able to read and write files correctly. ie my web server should be emitting utf8 for maximum compatibility but is putting out iso8859_1 for most files thanks to this quick fix It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Robert Colquhoun robert.colquh...@gmail.com wrote: It would be better for the rocket engineers to decide on a character encoding to talk to the server with and set it as a separate define(or hard code it maybe), according to oracle the basic encodings below should be available on most jvms : http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.3/docs/guide/intl/encoding.doc.html Updating post above - had another look at asjava.zip, there appears to be a more recent version in latest unidata at least that has a config parameter clientencoding used by the UniRPC class to convert to and from 16bit java characters to 8 bit characters for sending to socket. The files within the asjava.zip are dated Sept 10 2004. Cannot see where clientencoding is set anywhere in the code, if parameter is absent seems to use system encoding file.encoding as before. Seaching documentation cannot find any reference to it :( Somebody could experiment with it ie java -Dclientencoding=ISO8859_1 -classpath asjava.zip MyProgram to see if that works. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. Thanks for the tip. Looks like we do have a problem with the LANG setting. LANG=en_US.UTF-8 I'll check with IBM and see if changing it en_US.iso885915 will be OK with Domino. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Thanks. This is very helpful. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation From: Tony Gravagno 3xk547...@sneakemail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org, Date: 12/01/2011 10:18 PM Subject:Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org I follow John's policy in all web integration. All external access comes through a single entry point which identifies the purpose of the connection and transfers to an appropriate subroutine. I also include logging abilities in most code, just in case. Code below is made up for this example and not stylistically elegant nor complete. : SUBROUTINE ENTRY.POINT(QUERY,RESPONSE) INCLUDE WEB.COMMON * that routine does initialization, logging, breaks up query, etc BEGIN CASE CASE OPERATION=CUSTINQ CALL WEB.CUSTINQ(QUERY,RESPONSE) CASE 1 ; * bad request END CASE INCLUDE WEB.EXIT RETURN SUBROUTINE WEB.COMMON COMMON VARS(100) INCLUDE WEB.EQUATES ; * assign name to all VARS IF NOT(INITIALIZED) THEN GOSUB INIT IF LOGGING THEN GOSUB LOG RETURN SUBROUTINE WEB.EXIT IF LOGGING THEN GOSUB LOG ... RETURN Since all code includes WEB.COMMON, note from above that when LOGGING is active all routines will log on entry, and all programs have access to the common LOG function. HTH T From: John Hester Another gotcha I've run into in the past (also not app platform specific) is difficutly isolating bugs in UV subroutines that cause an abort. The result is a hung unirpc connection and a corresponding consumed license. If this problem happens in a frequently called subroutine, you can quickly find yourself with no UV licenses left. To isolate offending subroutines, I created a tracking subroutine that gets called at the beginning of each subroutine... ___ 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
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Hi, I'm also interested in any advice / best practices for UO for Java on Domino. It would certainly be nice to find a small user group to ask questions and bounce around best practices. I haven't tried using UniObjects for Java with Domino yet, but I have used the original OLE/COM version of UniObjects in LotusScript agents on Domino 8.5. We have been using that for some small-scale production jobs for the past year, and it has worked really well. The main problem I have is that the OLE/COM version of UniObjects hasn't been updated in years, and it doesn't seem to have a 64-bit version. I have looked for alternatives, like trying to register the UO for .Net client as an OLE/COM object, but for some reason that only exposes a handful of classes and methods; the vast majority of the functionality doesn't seem to be configured to work when accessed as an OLE/COM object. So unless Rocket releases a 64-bit version of the original UniObjects, my fallback plan is to move to UniObjects for Java, but I've been putting it off until I have some more time or find other people doing something similar to help motivate me. :-) Cheers, Jim Stoner Lead Programmer/Analyst SUNY Empire State College From: charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org, Date: 12/01/2011 03:38 PM Subject:[U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org Has anyone used Uniobjects for Java with Domino 8? If so, have you had luck with it. Any best practice suggestions? Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ 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
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
Jim Stoner Said It would certainly be nice to find a small user group to ask questions and bounce around best practices. I would definitely be interested in that. I haven't tried using UniObjects for Java with Domino yet, but I have used the original OLE/COM version of UniObjects in LotusScript agents on Domino 8.5. The COM library with LotusScript is what I've done in the past as well. The direct integration with Java archives is very interesting to me, but I haven't gotten into it much yet. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation From: jim.sto...@esc.edu To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org, Date: 12/01/2011 02:53 PM Subject:Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org Hi, I'm also interested in any advice / best practices for UO for Java on Domino. It would certainly be nice to find a small user group to ask questions and bounce around best practices. I haven't tried using UniObjects for Java with Domino yet, but I have used the original OLE/COM version of UniObjects in LotusScript agents on Domino 8.5. We have been using that for some small-scale production jobs for the past year, and it has worked really well. The main problem I have is that the OLE/COM version of UniObjects hasn't been updated in years, and it doesn't seem to have a 64-bit version. I have looked for alternatives, like trying to register the UO for .Net client as an OLE/COM object, but for some reason that only exposes a handful of classes and methods; the vast majority of the functionality doesn't seem to be configured to work when accessed as an OLE/COM object. So unless Rocket releases a 64-bit version of the original UniObjects, my fallback plan is to move to UniObjects for Java, but I've been putting it off until I have some more time or find other people doing something similar to help motivate me. :-) Cheers, Jim Stoner Lead Programmer/Analyst SUNY Empire State College From: charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org, Date: 12/01/2011 03:38 PM Subject:[U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org Has anyone used Uniobjects for Java with Domino 8? If so, have you had luck with it. Any best practice suggestions? Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ 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 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
We've been using UOJ with WebSphere App Server since around 2003. Not quite the same as Domino, I realize, but at least under the same IBM Java middleware umbrella. I can't offer a lot the way of best practices, but I can say that the combination is robust and trouble-free. This is more OS related, but if you're connecting to or from a linux box you need to make sure the LANG environment variable is set correctly. The RedHat default is incorrect for UOJ (at least up to EL 5) and will result in MV delimiters being incorrectly translated into other ascii characters. RedHat EL 5 stores the LANG value in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and the official setting I was given by IBM is en_US.iso885915. Another gotcha I've run into in the past (also not app platform specific) is difficutly isolating bugs in UV subroutines that cause an abort. The result is a hung unirpc connection and a corresponding consumed license. If this problem happens in a frequently called subroutine, you can quickly find yourself with no UV licenses left. To isolate offending subroutines, I created a tracking subroutine that gets called at the beginning of each subroutine with the caller's name as an argument. The tracking subroutine does the following: EXECUTE 'DUM ':PROG.NAME Where DUM is a dummy VOC entry that does nothing. This allows me to see the last subroutine called by the hung UOJ session in the PORT.STATUS output. The one best practice I can offer is to have a UniBASIC front-end utility for every UniBASIC UOJ subroutine for troubleshooting purposes. That way if you run into the situation above, you can call the subroutine from TCL and step through it in the debugger. -John -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 1:08 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Jim Stoner Said It would certainly be nice to find a small user group to ask questions and bounce around best practices. I would definitely be interested in that. I haven't tried using UniObjects for Java with Domino yet, but I have used the original OLE/COM version of UniObjects in LotusScript agents on Domino 8.5. The COM library with LotusScript is what I've done in the past as well. The direct integration with Java archives is very interesting to me, but I haven't gotten into it much yet. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation From: jim.sto...@esc.edu To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org, Date: 12/01/2011 02:53 PM Subject:Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org Hi, I'm also interested in any advice / best practices for UO for Java on Domino. It would certainly be nice to find a small user group to ask questions and bounce around best practices. I haven't tried using UniObjects for Java with Domino yet, but I have used the original OLE/COM version of UniObjects in LotusScript agents on Domino 8.5. We have been using that for some small-scale production jobs for the past year, and it has worked really well. The main problem I have is that the OLE/COM version of UniObjects hasn't been updated in years, and it doesn't seem to have a 64-bit version. I have looked for alternatives, like trying to register the UO for .Net client as an OLE/COM object, but for some reason that only exposes a handful of classes and methods; the vast majority of the functionality doesn't seem to be configured to work when accessed as an OLE/COM object. So unless Rocket releases a 64-bit version of the original UniObjects, my fallback plan is to move to UniObjects for Java, but I've been putting it off until I have some more time or find other people doing something similar to help motivate me. :-) Cheers, Jim Stoner Lead Programmer/Analyst SUNY Empire State College From: charles_shaf...@ntn-bower.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org, Date: 12/01/2011 03:38 PM Subject:[U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8 Sent by:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org Has anyone used Uniobjects for Java with Domino 8? If so, have you had luck with it. Any best practice suggestions? Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Uniobjects for Java and Domino 8
I follow John's policy in all web integration. All external access comes through a single entry point which identifies the purpose of the connection and transfers to an appropriate subroutine. I also include logging abilities in most code, just in case. Code below is made up for this example and not stylistically elegant nor complete. : SUBROUTINE ENTRY.POINT(QUERY,RESPONSE) INCLUDE WEB.COMMON * that routine does initialization, logging, breaks up query, etc BEGIN CASE CASE OPERATION=CUSTINQ CALL WEB.CUSTINQ(QUERY,RESPONSE) CASE 1 ; * bad request END CASE INCLUDE WEB.EXIT RETURN SUBROUTINE WEB.COMMON COMMON VARS(100) INCLUDE WEB.EQUATES ; * assign name to all VARS IF NOT(INITIALIZED) THEN GOSUB INIT IF LOGGING THEN GOSUB LOG RETURN SUBROUTINE WEB.EXIT IF LOGGING THEN GOSUB LOG ... RETURN Since all code includes WEB.COMMON, note from above that when LOGGING is active all routines will log on entry, and all programs have access to the common LOG function. HTH T From: John Hester Another gotcha I've run into in the past (also not app platform specific) is difficutly isolating bugs in UV subroutines that cause an abort. The result is a hung unirpc connection and a corresponding consumed license. If this problem happens in a frequently called subroutine, you can quickly find yourself with no UV licenses left. To isolate offending subroutines, I created a tracking subroutine that gets called at the beginning of each subroutine... ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
