Re: [U2] Disclosing technology - Was 'Has anyone ever heard of Kyle Stetson?'
Agreed. When managing a Pr1me shop on a college campus in the early 90's when so many youngsters and hackers knew *nix or Windows, I really appreciated the added "security by ignorance" we had on our administrative machines. If students were going to hack, it would be on the boxes other than where their grades were or the payroll was, for example There is something to be said for keeping such things quiet. It really isn't an impressive line item in a real security plan but does add to it. Good point, Dan. --dawn On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Dan McGrath wrote: > Just as an aside, there are better reasons for not making your > underlying technology public knowledge. A lot of companies have it in > their security policy to not disclose this information. Knowing a > company's underlying architecture makes it easier to look for specific > vulnerabilities or execute 0-day exploits. > > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis > Sent: Sunday, 10 April 2011 12:46 AM > To: U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Has anyone ever heard of Kyle Stetson? > > Thanks Dave for providing a first name. Is your name Dave Parkland? Are > you willing to provide the name of your company? I think Laura mistook > you as the OP for this post. > > I'm with Laura in thinking that in a forum like this, anonymity is not > as professional nor as effective (or even comforting or happy) as > letting us know who you are. I will grant that there could be reasons > for such anonymity, however. There are companies that would not want > anyone sending an email from their domain to any list related to any of > their underlying technology, thinking it all to be part of their > strategic advantage or possibly not wanting their competition, prospects > or customers to know about their technology for other reasons. Perhaps > most companies these days recognize there is some benefit to getting > their name out there, even with employees asking technical questions on > a list, but I'm guessing some still wish for more privacy. > > So, I am not opposed to you being somewhat anonymous if that is > important to you. A good way for someone to do this is to indicate in > some posting a name we can use, even if not your real name, and an > indication that you work for a company that wishes to remain anonymous. > Optimally I would like to know a person's full name and organization of > those in a community like this one. > > I, for one, prefer thinking of you as Dave Parkland (which might not be > your real name, but it works for me) to the not-a-name of "Address," > clever as that also seems. It makes what you write more trustworthy to > me. It would be even better if you indicated your company as well. I'm > sure there are social anthropologists (perhaps even among us) who could > tell us why names are important within communities. > > cheers! --dawn > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Address wrote: > > > By the way my name is Dave. Not sure why you are ranting. > > > > --- On Fri, 4/8/11, Laura Hirsh wrote: > > > > > From: Laura Hirsh > > > Subject: Re: [U2] Has anyone ever heard of Kyle Stetson? > > > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > > > Date: Friday, April 8, 2011, 9:27 PM Hey Charlie, > > > > > > Thanks for your kind reply. > > > > > > The thread from "Address" was on the topic, "Has anyone ever heard > > > of Kyle Stetson"? I was curious. Why *should* I have heard of him... > > > > why would this question be of interest to the U2 folks? > > > > > > But I felt silly addressing those questions to "Dear Address" or > > > "Hey mrparkland". Does Address have a first name? Is mrparkland > > > even a name?? This person has been posting under this alias for a > > > very long time - rarely, if ever, identifying themselves. The same > > > complaint recently came up regarding FFT2001. I *knew* who this > > > person was, but why hide??? FFT2001 has also been posting for quite > > > a long time, rarely identifying himself by first/last name. > > > > > > > > > I think that a professional group such as ours is for those who > > > value the content of messages and the exchange of thoughtful > > > comments. And as such, folks should identify themselves - at least > > > in closing a message for goodness sake. If one doesn't want to "own" > > > > their comments, then they shouldn't post them!!! I can't wait till > > > I'm in a meeting and am introduced... Laura, I'd like you to meet > > > "address" and sitting next to him is "fft2001". To me, *not* > > > identifying oneself by name is rude and inappropriate - at least for > > > > this group. Just my .02 cents. > > > > > > Thanks again Charlie for your kind message, and for identifying > > > yourself! . Hope you are doing well! > > > > > > Laura Hirsh > > > > > > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/list
Re: [U2] Disclosing technology - Was 'Has anyone ever heard of Kyle Stetson?'
> From: Dan McGrath > Just as an aside, there are better reasons for not making your > underlying technology public knowledge. A lot of companies have it in > their security policy to not disclose this information. Knowing a > company's underlying architecture makes it easier to look for specific > vulnerabilities or execute 0-day exploits. I'm glad someone else said this, even just as an aside to the current discussion. Some people have been making an effort recently to publish the names of vendors AND end-users of MV technology. When I cited the above security concerns for end-users, and suggested that companies be asked if it's OK if they are profiled in such a manner, the response was rather hostile. It seems some people feel they're entitled to publish whatever names they happen to find as a matter of freedom of information, or as a community service, even in complete disrespect for the wishes of the site. I sincerely hope people can be more respectful, and not feel like it's their right or obligation to "out" a company that does not wish to expose new attack vectors. Further, if you see your own company name somewhere and you feel this is a potential security threat, contact the publisher of the information, and if they don't comply with your wishes, please let us know. If enough people complain that a website owner is publishing security vulnerabilities, most ISPs will shut them down. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Disclosing technology - Was 'Has anyone ever heard of Kyle Stetson?'
Just as an aside, there are better reasons for not making your underlying technology public knowledge. A lot of companies have it in their security policy to not disclose this information. Knowing a company's underlying architecture makes it easier to look for specific vulnerabilities or execute 0-day exploits. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis Sent: Sunday, 10 April 2011 12:46 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Has anyone ever heard of Kyle Stetson? Thanks Dave for providing a first name. Is your name Dave Parkland? Are you willing to provide the name of your company? I think Laura mistook you as the OP for this post. I'm with Laura in thinking that in a forum like this, anonymity is not as professional nor as effective (or even comforting or happy) as letting us know who you are. I will grant that there could be reasons for such anonymity, however. There are companies that would not want anyone sending an email from their domain to any list related to any of their underlying technology, thinking it all to be part of their strategic advantage or possibly not wanting their competition, prospects or customers to know about their technology for other reasons. Perhaps most companies these days recognize there is some benefit to getting their name out there, even with employees asking technical questions on a list, but I'm guessing some still wish for more privacy. So, I am not opposed to you being somewhat anonymous if that is important to you. A good way for someone to do this is to indicate in some posting a name we can use, even if not your real name, and an indication that you work for a company that wishes to remain anonymous. Optimally I would like to know a person's full name and organization of those in a community like this one. I, for one, prefer thinking of you as Dave Parkland (which might not be your real name, but it works for me) to the not-a-name of "Address," clever as that also seems. It makes what you write more trustworthy to me. It would be even better if you indicated your company as well. I'm sure there are social anthropologists (perhaps even among us) who could tell us why names are important within communities. cheers! --dawn On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Address wrote: > By the way my name is Dave. Not sure why you are ranting. > > --- On Fri, 4/8/11, Laura Hirsh wrote: > > > From: Laura Hirsh > > Subject: Re: [U2] Has anyone ever heard of Kyle Stetson? > > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > > Date: Friday, April 8, 2011, 9:27 PM Hey Charlie, > > > > Thanks for your kind reply. > > > > The thread from "Address" was on the topic, "Has anyone ever heard > > of Kyle Stetson"? I was curious. Why *should* I have heard of him... > > why would this question be of interest to the U2 folks? > > > > But I felt silly addressing those questions to "Dear Address" or > > "Hey mrparkland". Does Address have a first name? Is mrparkland > > even a name?? This person has been posting under this alias for a > > very long time - rarely, if ever, identifying themselves. The same > > complaint recently came up regarding FFT2001. I *knew* who this > > person was, but why hide??? FFT2001 has also been posting for quite > > a long time, rarely identifying himself by first/last name. > > > > > > I think that a professional group such as ours is for those who > > value the content of messages and the exchange of thoughtful > > comments. And as such, folks should identify themselves - at least > > in closing a message for goodness sake. If one doesn't want to "own" > > their comments, then they shouldn't post them!!! I can't wait till > > I'm in a meeting and am introduced... Laura, I'd like you to meet > > "address" and sitting next to him is "fft2001". To me, *not* > > identifying oneself by name is rude and inappropriate - at least for > > this group. Just my .02 cents. > > > > Thanks again Charlie for your kind message, and for identifying > > yourself! . Hope you are doing well! > > > > Laura Hirsh > > > ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ### The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities othe
Re: [U2] Opinions on Cache
And with your last note yes, we are in complete agreement. :) Thanks. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Opinions on Cache
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Wols Lists wrote: > On 10/04/11 02:47, Dawn Wolthuis wrote: > >> > I am currently looking at how U2 fits in the cloud environment with > >> > products like Microsoft Azure and I think the model of U2 where each > table > >> > is a separate os file is better for cloud computing than Cache's one > system > >> > file (similar to the approach of other RDBMs). > >> > > > I think you have a case here, although the high availability, high > > scalability of Cache' might help in that regard. I do not have a clear > > understanding of possible shredding in either environment. > I didn't feel like looking up the word and as soon as I clicked send, I knew I intended the word "sharding." I'll admit I haven't looked into exactly what they mean by this, but I think the idea is to be able to separate sets of rows, not just partitioning by columns/files. > > Hmmm... > > Wheels within wheels etc. I think the ONLY advantage of separate tables > per file is that it is a convenient abstraction that our minds can grasp > easily. > For these huge web sites, I think the goals are related to partitioning onto separate servers. > > Look at Oracle, for example. It prefers not to use a file per database, > it just grabs a complete raw partition. > > The original Pick didn't have the concept of disk at all iirc - it just > used the disk as persistent virtual memory. > > To unix "everything is a file" - a filesystem is, to the kernel, just > another file. > > And once you get to virtual systems within virtual systems within > virtual systems ... :-) > At the end of the day, whether it's local or in the cloud or in a colo > I had to look up colo > or whatever, what you need is a decent backup strategy :-) > (and recovery!) but also a means to grow large without only a single central server stragey. I have looked at the ECP info from InterSystems http://www.intersystems.com/highavailability/ecp.html but have not looked at what might be analogous from U2 lately. --dawn > > Cheers, > Wol > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Opinions on Cache
Rather my point about the Pick issue is not to say that it is not a problem, it is more the perception of how to sell Pick to senior executives. Business management are not as concerned about technology as they are about results. They may have a concern or a perception about the technology being limiting but they can be convinced otherwise. What I would point out is that it is important that we as a community build the right message that argues the point. Unfortunately I hear too often people being apologetic of the technology rather than pushing its merits. Part of that problem is many people who have grown up with the PICK environment don't understand the limitations of other RDBMs. Many of the new sales of U2 are application driven not technology driven, PICK or U2 is not even mentioned. Many of the sites that are struggling with the PICK issue are sites that have based applications on the technology they have being PICK. The question is not about the technology but a concern if the application is tired. The application could be renewed two ways, replace it or put up a proposal to upgrade and renew the current application. Unfortunately many of these applications have moved into maintenance mode giving it the tired image. What I was trying to do with my comments, is to get people thinking about the strengths of U2. I invite some rigorous debate as it raises questions and generates new ideas people have never thought of. For instance with cloud computing, SQL database applications are designed to be multitenant. In other words I have one set of tables for my applications but I prefix every key with a company identifier. So on a multitenant CRM application where 100 companies are using the applications, the Customer Table would prefix the customer number with a unique identifier for each company using the application and they would all share the same table. With the structure of U2, it would be efficient enough to have a separate account for each company. Technically this might not be an issue to developers but perceptions to a business manager are different. They could perceive an issue of their data sitting alongside other company's data. As an IT manager trying to keep a Pick site, this information could stop a move to another application. What I would put to everyone at the moment is that we have been is a siege mentality over the last decade trying to convince IBM, Informix and management that U2 is a going concern. Now that Rocket has purchased U2 as a growth opportunity, the siege gates have been thrown open and we have the opportunity to attack the competition. As in sport, it is how we think that wins or loses opportunities and I believe that this is the essential issue, we need to change our thinking about Pick. In the last two years I have seen a major change in direction in IT thinking where U2 has some real opportunities. Governments around the world are having to trim budgets and they are not prepared to waste money on brand names. Larger corporations are cost sensitive. I believe U2 is in a strong position to take advantage of that change. Difficulty in finding people is not necessarily a negative. Right at the moment Microsoft SQL has a major issue that those who know TSQL are mostly 40+, I don't see Microsoft sales slowing down because of this. David Jordan ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Opinions on Cache
> From: David Jordan > From my observations, I don't quite agree on Tony's > summation of Cache vs U2. You are of course welcome to disagree, and I might even agree with some of your points. But several of your points disagree with statements that I didn't make. Rather than go through each in detail I'll leave to anyone who cares to simply eliminate what I didn't say from your disagreement. I wasn't really making a summation either, other than I believe Caché is worthy of investigation. I tried to open and close with a basic comparison, but tried to focus around the specific inquiry of the OP. In other words, there are a lot of right and wrong things about both U2 and Caché, Rocket and ISC, but that's not the question that was asked so I didn't elaborate beyond the inquiry. Finally, WRT "Honestly the PICK issue does not come up as much as people think it does, nor is it a hindrance." We're obviously working in different circles because I get inquiries about this almost every day, probably because this is what I do for a living. People call me because they need to make decisions about whether to keep MV or migrate away, add a GUI or integrate with some other environment that has one. IT managers ask what they can do quickly and with a low budget to get the new VPs off their back about getting rid of the DOS system. Company managers call me to ask why they can't find Pick people with RDBMS and Java/.NET experience. Programmers send me résumés because their company is migrating away from Pick. Of all the issues in this market that people pretend don't exist, let's not ignore one of the most major threats that we face. Rather, I'll accept that YOU don't see this, but please don't doubt that this IS a huge problem. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Opinions on Cache
On 10/04/11 02:47, Dawn Wolthuis wrote: >> > I am currently looking at how U2 fits in the cloud environment with >> > products like Microsoft Azure and I think the model of U2 where each table >> > is a separate os file is better for cloud computing than Cache's one >> > system >> > file (similar to the approach of other RDBMs). >> > > I think you have a case here, although the high availability, high > scalability of Cache' might help in that regard. I do not have a clear > understanding of possible shredding in either environment. Hmmm... Wheels within wheels etc. I think the ONLY advantage of separate tables per file is that it is a convenient abstraction that our minds can grasp easily. Look at Oracle, for example. It prefers not to use a file per database, it just grabs a complete raw partition. The original Pick didn't have the concept of disk at all iirc - it just used the disk as persistent virtual memory. To unix "everything is a file" - a filesystem is, to the kernel, just another file. And once you get to virtual systems within virtual systems within virtual systems ... :-) At the end of the day, whether it's local or in the cloud or in a colo or whatever, what you need is a decent backup strategy :-) Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
