Jerry,
We prefer to call it In-elegant Design and we teach it as an
alternative to your view of the UniVerse.
END OF THREAD - Move it to U2-Community or let it go.
Jerry Banker wrote:
So what you are saying is that relational theory, since it is not
proven, in essence does not exist.
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 7:56 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
On 7/20/07, Anthony W. Youngman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Dawn
Wolthuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
snip
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Dawn
Wolthuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Ummm ... but as Dawn says, a lot of its advocates treat it as a
mathematical model - and then use that to try and PREscribe how the
world is supposed to work - a mathematical trait if ever there was one!
I can't let that one
On 7/20/07, Anthony W. Youngman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Dawn
Wolthuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
snip
Mathematicians prove theories correct, Scientists prove theories
wrong.
Computer Science is in the business of proving things correct, therefore
it can't be
So what you are saying is that relational theory, since it is not
proven, in essence does not exist. :-)
Jerry
-Original Message-
From: Dawn Wolthuis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 9:56 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
So, when Date or Codd uses the term
Anthony W. Youngman skrev:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mats Carlid [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Anthony W. Youngman skrev:
At which point, you hit my hobbyhorse ... In the real world ... -
relational database theory has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING whatsoever to do
with the real world. It's an exercise
Just looked at the copy of Pick BASIC I have on my desktop and sure
enough, the technical editor is Mr. Clifton Oliver. So, he sold at
least one of those books.
--
Don Kibbey
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Dawn
Wolthuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
When this theory from set theory or predicate logic is applied to data
modeling or databases, it becomes applied. So, from a purist
standpoint, I'll vote with Wol on this. However, the Computer Science
community also uses
On 7/19/07, Anthony W. Youngman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mats Carlid [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
I really wanted to express two opinions :
1. RDBMS is not more pure maths than Pick.is.
It's just a heavily restricted special case of abstract relation theory.
It's
] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
--Not quite so easy to go .net - UniVerse.
Well put. This is one of the issues we are running into. We
are a .Net shop, and going from .Net to UV has been a challenge
to say the least. The primary issue being the overhead associated
with access the data via
,
Rob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of phil walker
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 4:22 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Nick,
Here, here to your following statements
To me
Robert,
There is a firmly held belief that if
books were available, that we, as a group, are too cheap to buy them. Clif
Oliver (who ran this list for 9 years) used to edit a Pick series of
O'Reilly. When I contacted Tim O'Reilly about a year ago, proposing new MV
books, he said that he'd love
AMEN!!
-Original Message-
From: Smith, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:14 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Good Morning,
I really enjoyed reading this thread. I can honestly say
Are we willing to spend $15 to $50 a piece for a new U2 book?
I don't think they'll have trouble finding willing writers.
I certainly would be! I'm old-fashioned enough to prefer real books
over electronic media. You can read words on paper anywhere, no
batteries required.
-Original Message-
From: Charles Barouch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:58 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Robert,
There is a firmly held belief that if
books were available
So would I.
-Original Message-
From: Norman Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:58 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Are we willing to spend $15 to $50 a piece for a new U2
:14 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Bill,
If you are using MV.NET, it has its own connection pooling which
is pretty well documented. That being the case, you don't even
need to use the UO.NET built in connection pooling.
Thanks
-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Phil:
A quick example is I'm trying to find out how their Connection Pool license
works.
Noone seems to know nor can I find out how this integrates with mv.Net using
UO.NET
as the connection. I can't find out how
.
george
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Barouch
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:58 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Robert
@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 6:14 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Good Morning,
I really enjoyed reading this thread. I can honestly say that the
diversity of experiences and people who comprise this listserv is amazing.
And I've found the shared knowledge
I'll purchase two! One for each developer. -Cliff
- Original Message -
From: Brenda Price
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 7:17 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
So would I.
-Original Message-
From
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Charles Barouch
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:58 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Robert,
There is a firmly held belief
@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
I was looking at our bookshelf, we have the old series of soft cover
manuals from V-Mark on UniVerse and then we have several books on PICK,
none of which is new. Our PICK books are from 1985 to 1990 mostly
published by TAB
] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Lets see I just spent 50.00 for a book on ajax, 80 for a book on
real estate accounting, 50 for a book on netbeans. Of course, I would
spend money on a book about Pick/U2/mvBasic on Cache.
I WOULD however exclude one author even if they gave the book away - so
others. And all together, the total volume eventually sold of
U2 books will not reach one-sixty-fourth the level of the
pending Harry Potter book. Still, I predict that a fair
A safe bet, since the initial U.S. printing is 12 million copies.
Nancy
this was discussed in the past at great length! To summarize:
When the U2UG was formed, we petitioned for IBM to open up their knowledge
sources. The problem is their vars, some of whom do not want their users to get
access (and presumably show up how p*ss p**r their support may be).
So
18, 2007 9:14 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Good Morning,
I really enjoyed reading this thread. I can honestly say that the diversity
of experiences and people who comprise this listserv is amazing. And I've
found the shared
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Kubarych
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 12:27
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
I would pony up for a U2 book.
Robert K. Kubarych
Network Services
Bergen Community College
CONFIDENTIALITY
@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Nancy
this was discussed in the past at great length! To summarize:
When the U2UG was formed, we petitioned for IBM to open up their knowledge
sources. The problem is their vars, some of whom
out the stuff you should already know because I do.
-Original Message-
From: Brutzman, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 12:07 PM
To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org'
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
The following eMail is not clear
or
there is a problem getting it through IBM.
-Original Message-
From: Nancy Fisher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 12:45 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
My var retrieved some info on setting up PDF from SB+ report
to be on the cards.
.learn and do
.excel and share
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Fisher
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 12:03 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Why doesn't IBM allow
to your report, even from
character (though it still uses SBClient for file transfer)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Fisher
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 1:45 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL
an application from anyone we are excluded from something that
might help us build it better and faster.
-Original Message-
From: David Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 1:10 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005
, 2007 2:55 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
So what you are saying is that a shop like ours that has over the years
developed everything in-house and the applications are specifically
geared to our business and can be changed as our
2pennies
Symeon.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jerry Banker
Sent: 18 July 2007 15:04
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
AMEN!!
-Original Message-
From: Smith, Robert [mailto
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jerry Banker
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 2:55 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
So what you are saying is that a shop like ours that has over the years
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brutzman, Bill
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:43 PM
To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org'
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Ditto... Almost everybody using U2 is doing in-house software development.
We
-
From: David Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:09 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Jerry,
Do you have currently have access to the knowledgebase?
It is possible (as I have had access before
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Charles Barouch
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:58 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Robert,
There is a firmly held belief that if
books were available, that we, as a group
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mats Carlid [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Anthony W. Youngman skrev:
At which point, you hit my hobbyhorse ... In the real world ... -
relational database theory has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING whatsoever to do
with the real world. It's an exercise in pure maths.
And You
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jerry Banker
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:14 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
I was looking at our bookshelf, we have the old series of soft cover
manuals from V-Mark
with Windows.
-Original Message-
From: David Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:09 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Jerry,
Do you have currently have access to the knowledgebase?
It is possible
about the implementation,
any benchmark is valid for that one configuration only.
Cheers,
Wol
-Original Message-
From: Geoffrey Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 16 July 2007 19:47
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Read Codd
, 2007 11:22 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
I do understand the advantages to that approach, Nick. But that was
also the thinking of those who prepared the current industry
benchmarks by locking in on SQL. My concern was that if you
I don't have any idea what you are trying to say.
A database should be a black box. You put data in and pull data out.
The less you have to know about the details of what goes on inside, the
better.
You can easily benchmark two black box systems that perform the same
function (with
Anthony W. Youngman skrev:
At which point, you hit my hobbyhorse ... In the real world ... -
relational database theory has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING whatsoever to do
with the real world. It's an exercise in pure maths.
And You hit my hobbyhorse or rather one of them :-) ...
RDMS theory is
@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
I don't have any idea what you are trying to say.
A database should be a black box. You put data in and pull data out.
The less you have to know about the details of what goes on inside, the
better.
You can easily benchmark two
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
I do understand the advantages to that approach, Nick. But that was
also the thinking of those who prepared the current industry
benchmarks by locking in on SQL. My concern was that if you specify
I end up getting badly bitten when that happens...
Cheers,
Wol
-Original Message-
From: Geoffrey Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 July 2007 15:58
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
I don't have any idea what you
16, 2007 11:22 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
I do understand the advantages to that approach, Nick. But that was
also the thinking of those who prepared the current industry
benchmarks by locking in on SQL. My concern was that if you
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of phil walker
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 4:22 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Nick,
Here, here to your following statements
To me, this is part of the problem that we have in the MV world. We
look at how
-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
This is one of the reasons that Cache is able to drum up some business
from shops that are using Universe, UniData, etc... Cache is very
forward thinking, and now with their mvbasic support, a viable option
for those
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of phil walker
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 4:22 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Nick,
Here, here to your following statements
To me, this is part of the problem that we have in the MV
is good
and bad practice.
Cheers,
Phil.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of LeRoy Dreyfuss
Sent: Wednesday, 18 July 2007 11:45 a.m.
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
These are interesting
Interesting thread. Even though I don't really have much to do with
UniVerse these days, I still enjoy reading (and learning from) these
forums.
I've been a long time user of both UniVerse and SQL Server. Developed
many things using one, the other or both db's as data sources. I
would say
--Not quite so easy to go .net - UniVerse.
Well put. This is one of the issues we are running into. We are a .Net
shop, and going from .Net to UV has been a challenge to say the least.
The primary issue being the overhead associated with access the data via
uo.net. Performance just isn't good
. [sigh] :-(
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of phil walker
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 4:56 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Leroy,
I know IBM are implementing much of these new
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of LeRoy Dreyfuss
Sent: Wednesday, 18 July 2007 11:45 a.m.
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
These are interesting comments considering all the tools available with
IBM U2 and the many things
] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:49 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Phil:
A quick example is I'm trying to find out how their Connection Pool
license works.
Noone seems to know nor can I find out how this integrates
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wally Terhune
Sent: Wednesday, 18 July 2007 2:31 p.m.
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Enroll for one of the U2 University events?
The detailed agenda
the .NET takes
quite
a bit of time and requires a lot of patience. :-)
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Cipollina
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 6:29 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Phil:
A quick example is I'm trying to find out how their Connection Pool license
works.
Noone seems to know nor can I find out how this integrates with mv.Net using
UO.NET
as the connection. I can't find out how to configure a connection
David Jordan wrote:
Tony
One thing, and I may be wrong, is that MV.Net is about accessing the
database directly. This puts Multivalue in the same bucket as other
RDBMS in performance.
David, mv.NET is a suite of three libraries, and there's more than one way
to run a program. Specific to
Read Codd and Date's rules. Can't remember which, but one of them
says the database user is not permitted to know how the database
stores the data. In other words, empirical testing is FORBIDDEN.
Seeing as empirical testing is *the* sine qua non of science,
relational databases are, BY
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
How does not being able to know how the data is stored prohibit
empirical testing? As long as you can provide inputs to a system and
retrieve outputs you can perform empirical tests.
--
Geoffrey
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoffrey
Mitchell
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 2:47 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
How does not being able to know how the data is stored prohibit
empirical testing? As long as you can provide
I agree with Geoffrey, Wol. It would not be pretty, but one could
presumably build a Nelson-Pick datamodel on top of data stored as
relational data are today (easier to put a relational model on PIck
since PIck is more fully featured). There is some tight-coupling
between the logical and
Dawn wrote:
I'm starting to get that fear of being tossed to u2-community vibe
when typing this... Time for some chocolate, perhaps. --dawn
I don't think this is a u2-community discussion. I've been contacted by a
few people who have found the discussions (benchmarks, web services, and
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 5:54 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Dawn wrote:
I'm starting to get that fear of being tossed to u2-community vibe
when typing this... Time for some chocolate
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno
Sent: Tuesday, 17 July 2007 11:31 a.m.
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Dawn wrote:
I'm starting to get that fear of being tossed to u2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 708-234-9608 Office 630-235-2975 Cell
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 5:54 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Dawn
phil walker wrote:
Why do that?
As long as the discussion is technical and relates to U2.
Personally I agree, but there are times when some discussions fork into
technical but very narrow directions. OK, proposal withdrawn, thanks.
T
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Of Dawn Wolthuis
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 4:58 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Yes, agreed. I think if you start with user requirements for services,
then have folks design for those requirements according to each
environment, that would
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 4:58 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Yes, agreed. I think if you start with user requirements for services,
then have folks design for those requirements
IBM AS400 developed a new transaction spec that suited the strengths of
their product. We should create on that suits the U2 model.
Unfortunately it will not be supported by IBM when it embarrasses DB2
Regards
David Jordan
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To
] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Dawn Wolthuis wrote:
I searched for some appropriate benchmarks in 2002, but it looked like
all industry standards, such as TCP benchmarks would compare apples
and oranges unless comparing only SQL-based functionality and
performance of SQL-based RDBMS tools
On 7/15/07, Tony Gravagno [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dawn Wolthuis wrote:
I searched for some appropriate benchmarks in 2002, but it looked like
all industry standards, such as TCP benchmarks would compare apples
and oranges unless comparing only SQL-based functionality and
performance of
Dawn Wolthuis wrote:
5) Do similar tests using common ODBC/OLEDB tools.
You will be hard-pressed to get products like OpenQM to participate in
that test ;-) There can be useful information with such tests, but if
the products are never or rarely used with such tools, then those
products can
Tony
One thing, and I may be wrong, is that MV.Net is about accessing the
database directly. This puts Multivalue in the same bucket as other RDBMS
in performance.
An area of efficiency and capability of U2 is in the Basic programs within
U2. We need to access those from .Net as we would a
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Jordan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
In the realworld we have complex transactions, not always the simple Dr,Cr
of a general ledger. A transaction will often involve various business
rules and accessing multiple files for checks and process tables. With most
On 7/12/07, Robert Kubarych [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is anyone aware of any performance benchmarks for UniData 7.1? How does
it stack up against SQL 2005?
Hi Robert --
I searched for some appropriate benchmarks in 2002, but it looked like
all industry standards, such as TCP benchmarks would
Dawn Wolthuis wrote:
I searched for some appropriate benchmarks in 2002, but it looked like
all industry standards, such as TCP benchmarks would compare apples
and oranges unless comparing only SQL-based functionality and
performance of SQL-based RDBMS tools.
TPC-B allowed any sort of
Cipollina
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Jordan
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 10:27 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Hi Robert
Performance Benchmarking needs to be aligned
Is anyone aware of any performance benchmarks for UniData 7.1? How does
it stack up against SQL 2005?
Robert K. Kubarych
Network Services
Bergen Community College
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Is anyone aware of any performance benchmarks for UniData 7.1? How does it
stack up against SQL 2005?
Robert K. Kubarych
Network Services
Bergen Community College
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http
fair game.
:-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Theo
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 3:52 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
How would you compare the two?
See what select based
: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance
Is anyone aware of any performance benchmarks for UniData 7.1? How does
it
stack up against SQL 2005?
Robert K. Kubarych
Network Services
Bergen Community College
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit
Hi Robert
Performance Benchmarking needs to be aligned with a business measure.
Most performance benchmarks are done on the basis of Simple transactions per
second.
However where U2 realy bolts ahead is in complex transactions per second.
In the realworld we have complex transactions, not
89 matches
Mail list logo
