Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
Almost. Though the file will look after itself, it may not do so very well. Dynamic files, for best performance, do sometimes need periodic resizing. Having said that it is true that some never resize Dynamic files. If the minimum modulo is much lower than the actual, then this will cause constant splits to occur if the file is constantly growing. The 80% actual load is further indication of this. What can be even worse is if the file then shrinks dramatically in this case as very intensive merges will takes place - not desirable if you expect the file to grow again. In this case I would choose a new modulo greater than the actual - how much bigger depends on the rate of growth expected. That is with the current separation - the best separation you will only determine by examining the size of the records. Martin Phillips martinphill...@ladybridge.com wrote in message news:00f601cd588c$cd3d1310$67b73930$@ladybridge.com... Hi Chris, The whole point of dynamic files is that you don't do RESIZE. The file will look after itself, automatically responding to variations in the volume of data. There are knobs to twiddle but in most cases they can safely be left at their defaults. A dynamic file will never perform as well as a perfectly tuned static file but they are a heck of a lot better than typical static files that haven't been reconfigured for ages. Martin Phillips Ladybridge Systems Ltd 17b Coldstream Lane, Hardingstone, Northampton NN4 6DB, England +44 (0)1604-709200 -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: 02 July 2012 20:22 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files I was wondering if anyone had instructions on RESIZE with a dynamic file? For example I have a file called 'TEST_FILE' with the following: 01 ANALYZE.FILE TEST_FILE File name .. TEST_FILE Pathname ... TEST_FILE File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 83261 current ( minimum 31 ) Large record size .. 3267 bytes Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 450613248 bytes How do you calculate what the modulus and separation should be? I can't use HASH.HELP on a type 30 file to see the recommended settings so I was wondering how best you figure out the file RESIZE. Thanks, Chris ___ 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 to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. This e-mail was sent to you by GPM Development Ltd. We are incorporated under the laws of England and Wales (company no. 2292156 and VAT registration no. 523 5622 63). Our registered office is 6th Floor, AMP House, Croydon, Surrey CR0 2LX. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Running XLr8 Tools inside U2 DBTools new Eclipse release
Sadly I *do* have to use Eclipse on OSX. It's the best way I've found so far to write fast iOS/Android apps (using Appcelerator Titanium). It's also ugly as sin. Grrr Brian -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Symeon Breen Sent: 03 July 2012 10:16 To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Running XLr8 Tools inside U2 DBTools new Eclipse release OSX? - that's handy - appealing to the masses there ;) ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Running XLr8 Tools inside U2 DBTools new Eclipse release
One of our Java programmers lives and breaths Mac's. We develop on the Mac and run on the Mac. We have for years many years been running on the Mac. There are many things that have to be tuned for the Mac on Eclipse. Whether it is the the Java libraries that are slightly different or SWT, there is a lot of work that has to be Mac specific. Regards, Doug www.u2logic.com/tools.html ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] UniVerse LIST statement question [not-secure]
What Brian said, except don't replace LIST! Rather, write your subroutine to be called from an I-descriptors: MARKH 0001 FUNCTION MARKH( INARG ) 0002 COMMON /MARKH/ START.IDT, END.IDT, PREV.ID, VLIST 0003 * 0004 * Assumes common has been initialized properly before this function 0005 * is called from i-descriptors 0006 * 0007 IF @ID = PREV.ID ELSE 0008 IDTS = @RECORD 10 0009 VLIST = 0010 VMC = 0 0011 VMAX = DCOUNT( IDTS, @VM ) 0012 FOR V = 1 TO VMAX 0013 IDT = IDTS1,V 0014 IF IDT = START.IDT THEN IF IDT = END.IDT THEN VLIST-1 = V 0015 NEXT V 0016 END 0017 * 0018 OUTARG = 0019 MORE = LEN( VLIST ); * true/false 0020 LOOP WHILE MORE 0021 REMOVE V FROM VLIST SETTING MORE 0022 OUTARG1,-1 = INARG1, V 0023 REPEAT 0024 SETREM 0 ON VLIST 0025 * 0026 RETURN( OUTARG ) 0027END An example using it is below. It's more flexible and maintainable in the long run than tossing RETRIEVE altogether. (Actually, I do think it can be done with the mv-handling functions but an I-descriptor subroutine will be more maintainable.) Your sub should limits the output to the values you want. If every value is out of range, your subr returns null. It can be called for various associated fields, and the 1st time called for a given @ID it figures out the value range, and saves to labeled common what vals you want for that record. Subsequent calls to the sub, as long as @ID hasn't changed, gets the already calculated value range from common, and applies it to the field you pass it. The only trick is feeding your subroutine the date range you won't know until runtime.I don't know a good way to feed an I-descriptor command line parameters such as = 6/1/2012 = 6/30/2012 You'll need to set them in a control record or, better, in @USER1, @USER2, or in your labeled common before the LIST is executed. Use the I-descriptors that call your subroutine as output criteria and not WITH or WHEN selection criteria. The guts of the subr will do the selection limits. That may not be altogether clear. Here's an example. 1st the relevant dict entries then an example: DICT RTAG09:45:22am 03 Jul 2012 Page1 Field. Type Field Conversion.. Column. Output Depth Name.. Field. Definition... Code Heading Format Assoc.. Number LOCD3 12LS EVENT.CODE D8Event 4L M EVENT .ASSOC Code EVENT.DT D 10 D2/ Event 8R M EVENT .ASSOC Date PRINTERD 13 15LS MARKH.CODE I SUBR( Event 4L M MARKH 'MARKH', .ASSOC EVENT.CODE ) Code MARKH.DT I SUBR( D2/ Event 8R M MARKH 'MARKH', .ASSOC EVENT.DT ) Date MARKH.ASSOCPH MARKH.LINO MARKH.CODE MARKH.REF MARKH.DT MARKH.TM MARKH.WHO MARKH.DTM 7 records listed. RUN CDS.BP MARKH.INIT 4/1 4/30 LIST RTAG LOC PRINTER EVENT.CODE EVENT.DT MARKH.CODE MARKH.DT LIST RTAG LOC PRINTER EVENT.CODE EVENT.DT MARKH.CODE MARKH.DT 09:46:05am 03 Jul 2012 PAGE1 Return.. LOC. PRINTER Event Event... Event Event... Tag. Code. Date Code. Date 5137176 TPAWHSE-IN ZEBRATPAPRINT 02/08/12 NEW 11/04/11 10009741 EROCWHSE-OUT PI04/26/12 PI 04/26/12 NEW 04/26/12 NEW 04/26/12 5135103 PROCWHSE-DEF REQ 12/30/11 REQ 12/30/11 ASGN 12/30/11 FREE 11/03/11 5134267 EROCDPO-DIN ZEBRATPAI 03/01/12 PRINT 02/08/12 REQ 12/09/11 ASGN 12/09/11 FREE 11/03/11 10010396 DFWWHSE PI05/22/12 NEW 05/22/12 5119929 SI04/10/12 SI 04/10/12 NEW 09/20/11 10004562 CROCWHSE-OUT ZEBRAEROC PRINT 04/04/12 PRINT 04/04/12 PRINT 01/31/12 PRINT 01/24/12 PRINT
[U2] Exiting UniData
Going back to my post about runaway processes: According to our UniData manuals, the official commands to terminate a UniData session are BYE, LO and QUIT. I have since found that LO and OFF (not sure where this came from) simply run the QUIT command. QUIT runs an SB command called SH.OFF (which we obviously do not have the source code to review). BYE still runs the verb BYE, so nothing different there. We are using Avanté which obviously is built with SB. My question is this: do ALL SB sites change the value of QUIT to run SH.OFF, or was this something that Epicor does? If anyone is using SB but NOT using an Epicor product, what does your QUIT command do? Thanks John ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Exiting UniData
Runs the globally cataloged program _SB_SH.OFF -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Israel, John R. Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 10:31 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: [U2] Exiting UniData Going back to my post about runaway processes: According to our UniData manuals, the official commands to terminate a UniData session are BYE, LO and QUIT. I have since found that LO and OFF (not sure where this came from) simply run the QUIT command. QUIT runs an SB command called SH.OFF (which we obviously do not have the source code to review). BYE still runs the verb BYE, so nothing different there. We are using Avanté which obviously is built with SB. My question is this: do ALL SB sites change the value of QUIT to run SH.OFF, or was this something that Epicor does? If anyone is using SB but NOT using an Epicor product, what does your QUIT command do? Thanks John ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users Dave Davis Team Lead, RD P: 614-875-4910 x108 F: 614-875-4088 E: dda...@harriscomputer.com [http://www.harriscomputer.com/images/signatures/HarrisSchools.gif] [http://www.harriscomputer.com/images/signatures/DivisionofHarris.gif]http://www.harriscomputer.com/ 6110 Enterprise Parkway Grove City, OH 43123 www.harris-schoolsolutions.comhttp://www.harris-schoolsolutions.com This message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the message. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] UniVerse LIST statement question [not-secure]
Ed is quite right. 1: I just did it for simplicity in the example. 2: @SENTENCE, without a wrapper: you have do get ReTrieve to ignore part of the sentence. I've never come up with a good way to do that other than via EVAL. Anyone? 3. EVAL: Yes, it is a way to pass run-time parameters! I tend to forget about it because I - personally - don't like it in production. EVAL means dictionaries can't be read-only. And they tend to permanently leave temporary I-descriptors scattered in the dicts if when something terminates abnormally. RetrieVe rudely spits the EVAL compilation report into the output, too. If you have multiple associated columns, if your usage gets fancy (that (future) option is a reason for this approach), then your EVAL may need ASSOC, ASSOC.WITH, MULTIVALUED keywords, besides AS, FMT, COL.HDG. Other than that, I love EVAL. On 7/3/2012 11:08 AM, Ed Clark wrote: There are 3 ways I can think of offhand to tell the subroutine what date range to use. I like #3 the best: 1: use common variables, which is what the example function MARKH does. The downside is that you have to assign the common variables before you run the query. 2: You could use @SENTENCE in the function and parse out the date range. That could be easy or hard depending on how many people write queries and what odd contortions of syntax they use. But both #1 and #2 could be simplified by writing a wrapper program. An example command line would look like: QLAUNCH 06/01/2012 06/30/2012 ~ LIST MYFILE INRANGE QLAUNCH parses arguments before the '~` delimiter and puts them into a common. The INRANGE attribute calls the function MARKH which uses the common. 3: use the function directly from the command line with EVAL: LIST MYFILE EVAL SUBR('MARKH','06/01/2012','06/30/2012') AS MYCOL COL.HDG WHATEVER FMT 11L It's wordier, but you have very fine-grained control over what comes out on the report. COL.HDG, and FMT are optional and AS is optional in this case. You would us it if you wanted to sort or break on the EVAL column. On Jul 3, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Charles Stevenson wrote: What Brian said, except don't replace LIST! Rather, write your subroutine to be called from an I-descriptors: MARKH 0001 FUNCTION MARKH( INARG ) 0002 COMMON /MARKH/ START.IDT, END.IDT, PREV.ID, VLIST 0003 * 0004 * Assumes common has been initialized properly before this function 0005 * is called from i-descriptors 0006 * 0007 IF @ID = PREV.ID ELSE 0008 IDTS = @RECORD 10 0009 VLIST = 0010 VMC = 0 0011 VMAX = DCOUNT( IDTS, @VM ) 0012 FOR V = 1 TO VMAX 0013 IDT = IDTS1,V 0014 IF IDT = START.IDT THEN IF IDT = END.IDT THEN VLIST-1 = V 0015 NEXT V 0016 END 0017 * 0018 OUTARG = 0019 MORE = LEN( VLIST ); * true/false 0020 LOOP WHILE MORE 0021 REMOVE V FROM VLIST SETTING MORE 0022 OUTARG1,-1 = INARG1, V 0023 REPEAT 0024 SETREM 0 ON VLIST 0025 * 0026 RETURN( OUTARG ) 0027END An example using it is below. It's more flexible and maintainable in the long run than tossing RETRIEVE altogether. (Actually, I do think it can be done with the mv-handling functions but an I-descriptor subroutine will be more maintainable.) Your sub should limits the output to the values you want. If every value is out of range, your subr returns null. It can be called for various associated fields, and the 1st time called for a given @ID it figures out the value range, and saves to labeled common what vals you want for that record. Subsequent calls to the sub, as long as @ID hasn't changed, gets the already calculated value range from common, and applies it to the field you pass it. The only trick is feeding your subroutine the date range you won't know until runtime.I don't know a good way to feed an I-descriptor command line parameters such as = 6/1/2012 = 6/30/2012 You'll need to set them in a control record or, better, in @USER1, @USER2, or in your labeled common before the LIST is executed. Use the I-descriptors that call your subroutine as output criteria and not WITH or WHEN selection criteria. The guts of the subr will do the selection limits. That may not be altogether clear. Here's an example. 1st the relevant dict entries then an example: DICT RTAG09:45:22am 03 Jul 2012 Page1 Field. Type Field Conversion.. Column. Output Depth Name.. Field. Definition... Code Heading Format Assoc.. Number LOCD3 12LS EVENT.CODE D8Event 4L M EVENT .ASSOC Code EVENT.DT D 10 D2/ Event 8R M EVENT .ASSOC Date PRINTERD 13 15LS MARKH.CODE I SUBR( Event 4L
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 92776 current ( minimum 31, 89 empty, 28229 overflowed, 2485 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 500600832 bytes Total size of record data .. 287035391 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508449 bytes Unused space ... 192048800 bytes Total space for records 500592640 bytes Using the record above, how would I calculate the following? 1) MINIMUM.MODULUS (Is there a formula to use or should I add 20% to the current number)? 2) SPLIT - would 90% seem about right? 3) MERGE - would 20% seem about right? 4) Large Record Size - does 3276 seem right? 5) Group Size - should I be using 4096? I'm just a bit confused as to how to set these, I saw the formula to calculate the MINIMUM.MODULUS which is (record + id / 4096 or 2048) but I always get a lower number than my current modulus.. I also saw where it said to simply take your current modulus # and add 10-20% and set the MINIMUM.MODULUS based on that.. Based on the table above I'm just trying to get an idea of what these should be set at. Thanks, Chris From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:28:17 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Doug, When I do the math I come up with a different # (see below): File name .. TEST_FILE Pathname ... TEST_FILE File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 82850 current ( minimum 24, 104 empty, 26225 overflowed, 1441 badly ) Number of records .. 1157122 Large record size .. 2036 bytes Number of large records 576 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 449605632 bytes Total size of record data .. 258687736 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 19283300 bytes Unused space ... 171626404 bytes Total space for records 449597440 bytes -- 258,687,736 bytes - Total size of record data 19,283,300 bytes - Total size of record IDs === 277,971,036 bytes (record + id's) 277,971,036 / 4,084 = 68,063 bytes (minimum modulus) -- 68,063 is less than the current modulus of 82,850. Something with this formula doesn't seem right because if I use that formula I always calculate a minimum modulus of less than the current modulus. Thanks, Chris Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 16:08:16 -0600 From: dave...@gmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Hi Chris: You cannot get away with not resizing dynamic files in my experience. The files do not split and merge like we are led to believe. The separator is not used on dynamic files. Your Universe file is badly sized. The math below will get you reasonably file size. Let's do the math: 258687736 (Record Size) 192283300 (Key Size) 450,971,036 (Data and Key Size) 4096 (Group Size) - 12 (32 Bit Overhead) 4084 Usable Space 450971036/4084 = Minimum Modulo 110424 (Prime is 110431) [ad] I hate doing this math all of the time. I have a reasonably priced resize program called XLr8Resizer for $99.00 to do this for me. [/ad] Regards, Doug www.u2logic.com/tools.html XLr8Resizer for the rest of us ___ 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] RESIZE - dynamic files
Yep, I added an extra 2 in the key value. Oh, the perils of cut and paste... ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
No worries Doug. I'm just wondering if the calculation makes sense (if we use the example below): File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 92776 current ( minimum 31, 89 empty, 28229 overflowed, 2485 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 500600832 bytes Total size of record data .. 287035391 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508449 bytes Unused space ... 192048800 bytes Total space for records 500592640 bytes FORMULA - (287,035,391+21,508,449) / (4,084) = 75,549 MINIMUM.MODULUS The question I have is whether 75,549 makes sense for this record. I thought the MINIMUM.MODULUS was supposed to be bigger than the number of groups (92,776 in this case)? Chris Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 11:04:53 -0600 From: dave...@gmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Yep, I added an extra 2 in the key value. Oh, the perils of cut and paste... ___ 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] RESIZE - dynamic files
See comment interspersed... Using the record above, how would I calculate the following? 1) MINIMUM.MODULUS (Is there a formula to use or should I add 20% to the current number)? Should be less the the current size, if you want the file to merge 2) SPLIT - would 90% seem about right? Depends on the history of the file. Is the data growing over time? The way the file looks now the split should be reduced because you have 31% in overflow. 3) MERGE - would 20% seem about right? Won't be used on a growth file, so the file history is important. 4) Large Record Size - does 3276 seem right? Can be calculated with a lot of effort, but yield little gain. 5) Group Size - should I be using 4096? You have two group sizes on dynamic files 2048 and 4096. If you lower it you need to double your modulo, roughly. If you keep it the same you need to increase your modulo because 31% of your file is in overflow. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
(record + id / 4096 or 2048) You need to factor in overhead the split factor: (records + ids) * 1.1 * 1.25 / 4096(for 80%) If you use a 20% merge factor and a 80% split factor, the file will start merging unless you delete 60 percent of your records. If you use 90% split factor, you will have more overflowed groups. These numbers refer to the total amount of data in the file, not to any individual group. For records of the size that you have, I do not see any advantage to using a larger, 4096, group size. You will end up with twice the number of records per group vs 2048 (~ 13 vs ~ 7 ), and a little slower keyed access. -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 9:48 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 92776 current ( minimum 31, 89 empty, 28229 overflowed, 2485 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 500600832 bytes Total size of record data .. 287035391 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508449 bytes Unused space ... 192048800 bytes Total space for records 500592640 bytes Using the record above, how would I calculate the following? 1) MINIMUM.MODULUS (Is there a formula to use or should I add 20% to the current number)? 2) SPLIT - would 90% seem about right? 3) MERGE - would 20% seem about right? 4) Large Record Size - does 3276 seem right? 5) Group Size - should I be using 4096? I'm just a bit confused as to how to set these, I saw the formula to calculate the MINIMUM.MODULUS which is (record + id / 4096 or 2048) but I always get a lower number than my current modulus.. I also saw where it said to simply take your current modulus # and add 10-20% and set the MINIMUM.MODULUS based on that.. Based on the table above I'm just trying to get an idea of what these should be set at. Thanks, Chris From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:28:17 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Doug, When I do the math I come up with a different # (see below): File name .. TEST_FILE Pathname ... TEST_FILE File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 82850 current ( minimum 24, 104 empty, 26225 overflowed, 1441 badly ) Number of records .. 1157122 Large record size .. 2036 bytes Number of large records 576 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 449605632 bytes Total size of record data .. 258687736 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 19283300 bytes Unused space ... 171626404 bytes Total space for records 449597440 bytes -- 258,687,736 bytes - Total size of record data 19,283,300 bytes - Total size of record IDs === 277,971,036 bytes (record + id's) 277,971,036 / 4,084 = 68,063 bytes (minimum modulus) -- 68,063 is less than the current modulus of 82,850. Something with this formula doesn't seem right because if I use that formula I always calculate a minimum modulus of less than the current modulus. Thanks, Chris Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 16:08:16 -0600 From: dave...@gmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Hi Chris: You cannot get away with not resizing dynamic files in my experience. The files do not split and merge like we are led to believe. The separator is not used on dynamic files. Your Universe file is badly sized. The math below will get you reasonably file size. Let's do the math: 258687736 (Record Size) 192283300 (Key Size) 450,971,036 (Data and Key Size) 4096 (Group Size) - 12 (32 Bit Overhead) 4084 Usable Space 450971036/4084 = Minimum Modulo 110424 (Prime is 110431) [ad] I hate doing this math all of the time. I have a reasonably priced resize program called XLr8Resizer for $99.00 to do this for me. [/ad] Regards, Doug www.u2logic.com/tools.html XLr8Resizer for the rest of us ___ U2-Users
Re: [U2] Running XLr8 Tools inside U2 DBTools new Eclipse release
Hi Dan and others: I finished testing all of the Rocket tools. Turns out the only one that really works as a plug-in platform is BDT for U2logic plug-ins. The other products are crippled versions of Eclipse with limited menus by design. Another big problem is that Rocket's Eclipse products do not share work spaces, so if you start BDT your work space is in that directory. If you start U2Admin the work space is in that directory. Unfortunately this situation is very messy for U2logic, a Rocket VAR, to support. I'm going to have fun explaining this to the first client that asks why the programs don't share the server names. Regards, Doug www.u2logic.com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
So for this example what would be a good SPLIT level and what would be a good MERGE level to use? It was my understanding that I wanted to lower my merge to something below 50% and increase the split to reduce splitting. Chris From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:21:16 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files (record + id / 4096 or 2048) You need to factor in overhead the split factor: (records + ids) * 1.1 * 1.25 / 4096(for 80%) If you use a 20% merge factor and a 80% split factor, the file will start merging unless you delete 60 percent of your records. If you use 90% split factor, you will have more overflowed groups. These numbers refer to the total amount of data in the file, not to any individual group. For records of the size that you have, I do not see any advantage to using a larger, 4096, group size. You will end up with twice the number of records per group vs 2048 (~ 13 vs ~ 7 ), and a little slower keyed access. -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 9:48 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 92776 current ( minimum 31, 89 empty, 28229 overflowed, 2485 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 500600832 bytes Total size of record data .. 287035391 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508449 bytes Unused space ... 192048800 bytes Total space for records 500592640 bytes Using the record above, how would I calculate the following? 1) MINIMUM.MODULUS (Is there a formula to use or should I add 20% to the current number)? 2) SPLIT - would 90% seem about right? 3) MERGE - would 20% seem about right? 4) Large Record Size - does 3276 seem right? 5) Group Size - should I be using 4096? I'm just a bit confused as to how to set these, I saw the formula to calculate the MINIMUM.MODULUS which is (record + id / 4096 or 2048) but I always get a lower number than my current modulus.. I also saw where it said to simply take your current modulus # and add 10-20% and set the MINIMUM.MODULUS based on that.. Based on the table above I'm just trying to get an idea of what these should be set at. Thanks, Chris From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:28:17 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Doug, When I do the math I come up with a different # (see below): File name .. TEST_FILE Pathname ... TEST_FILE File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 82850 current ( minimum 24, 104 empty, 26225 overflowed, 1441 badly ) Number of records .. 1157122 Large record size .. 2036 bytes Number of large records 576 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 449605632 bytes Total size of record data .. 258687736 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 19283300 bytes Unused space ... 171626404 bytes Total space for records 449597440 bytes -- 258,687,736 bytes - Total size of record data 19,283,300 bytes - Total size of record IDs === 277,971,036 bytes (record + id's) 277,971,036 / 4,084 = 68,063 bytes (minimum modulus) -- 68,063 is less than the current modulus of 82,850. Something with this formula doesn't seem right because if I use that formula I always calculate a minimum modulus of less than the current modulus. Thanks, Chris Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 16:08:16 -0600 From: dave...@gmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Hi Chris: You cannot get away with not resizing dynamic files in my experience. The files do not split and merge like we are led to believe. The separator is not used on dynamic files. Your Universe file is badly sized. The math below will get you reasonably file size. Let's do the math: 258687736 (Record Size)
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
Doug, The data is growing over time with this file. Does that mean I should ignore the formula? Or should I still use a lower MINIMUM.MODULO than the actual modulo #.. Is the idea to reduce overflow by lowering the split? What is this 'overflow' referring to? 2) SPLIT - would 90% seem about right? Depends on the history of the file. Is the data growing over time? The way the file looks now the split should be reduced because you have 31% in overflow. So basically don't spend much time worrying about large record size? 4) Large Record Size - does 3276 seem right? Can be calculated with a lot of effort, but yield little gain. This seems like a moot point as well, as long as the ratio in regards to the MINIMUM.MODULO is set proportionally? 5) Group Size - should I be using 4096? You have two group sizes on dynamic files 2048 and 4096. If you lower it you need to double your modulo, roughly. If you keep it the same you need to increase your modulo because 31% of your file is in overflow. Chris ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
Using the formula below, and changing the split to 90% I get the following: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 103889 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 22249 overflowed, 1764 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 72% (actual) Total size . 519921664 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400591 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508497 bytes Unused space ... 211004384 bytes Total space for records 519913472 bytes How does this look in terms of performance? My Actual load went down 8% as well as some overflow but it looks like my load % is still high at 72% I'm wondering if I should raise the MINIMUM.MODULUS even more since I still have a decent amount of overflow and not many large records. Chris From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:21:16 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files (record + id / 4096 or 2048) You need to factor in overhead the split factor: (records + ids) * 1.1 * 1.25 / 4096(for 80%) If you use a 20% merge factor and a 80% split factor, the file will start merging unless you delete 60 percent of your records. If you use 90% split factor, you will have more overflowed groups. These numbers refer to the total amount of data in the file, not to any individual group. For records of the size that you have, I do not see any advantage to using a larger, 4096, group size. You will end up with twice the number of records per group vs 2048 (~ 13 vs ~ 7 ), and a little slower keyed access. -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 9:48 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 92776 current ( minimum 31, 89 empty, 28229 overflowed, 2485 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 500600832 bytes Total size of record data .. 287035391 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508449 bytes Unused space ... 192048800 bytes Total space for records 500592640 bytes Using the record above, how would I calculate the following? 1) MINIMUM.MODULUS (Is there a formula to use or should I add 20% to the current number)? 2) SPLIT - would 90% seem about right? 3) MERGE - would 20% seem about right? 4) Large Record Size - does 3276 seem right? 5) Group Size - should I be using 4096? I'm just a bit confused as to how to set these, I saw the formula to calculate the MINIMUM.MODULUS which is (record + id / 4096 or 2048) but I always get a lower number than my current modulus.. I also saw where it said to simply take your current modulus # and add 10-20% and set the MINIMUM.MODULUS based on that.. Based on the table above I'm just trying to get an idea of what these should be set at. Thanks, Chris From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:28:17 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Doug, When I do the math I come up with a different # (see below): File name .. TEST_FILE Pathname ... TEST_FILE File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 82850 current ( minimum 24, 104 empty, 26225 overflowed, 1441 badly ) Number of records .. 1157122 Large record size .. 2036 bytes Number of large records 576 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 449605632 bytes Total size of record data .. 258687736 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 19283300 bytes Unused space ... 171626404 bytes Total space for records 449597440
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
I would recommend that if you intend to do resizing on a regular basis an you want to improve the performance of the file you might consider resizing the file to a static file type so that you can have more control over the hashing algorithm, separation and modulo. Chris Austin wrote: Using the formula below, and changing the split to 90% I get the following: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 103889 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 22249 overflowed, 1764 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 72% (actual) Total size . 519921664 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400591 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508497 bytes Unused space ... 211004384 bytes Total space for records 519913472 bytes How does this look in terms of performance? My Actual load went down 8% as well as some overflow but it looks like my load % is still high at 72% I'm wondering if I should raise the MINIMUM.MODULUS even more since I still have a decent amount of overflow and not many large records. Chris From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:21:16 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files (record + id / 4096 or 2048) You need to factor in overhead the split factor: (records + ids) * 1.1 * 1.25 / 4096(for 80%) If you use a 20% merge factor and a 80% split factor, the file will start merging unless you delete 60 percent of your records. If you use 90% split factor, you will have more overflowed groups. These numbers refer to the total amount of data in the file, not to any individual group. For records of the size that you have, I do not see any advantage to using a larger, 4096, group size. You will end up with twice the number of records per group vs 2048 (~ 13 vs ~ 7 ), and a little slower keyed access. -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 9:48 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 92776 current ( minimum 31, 89 empty, 28229 overflowed, 2485 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 500600832 bytes Total size of record data .. 287035391 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508449 bytes Unused space ... 192048800 bytes Total space for records 500592640 bytes Using the record above, how would I calculate the following? 1) MINIMUM.MODULUS (Is there a formula to use or should I add 20% to the current number)? 2) SPLIT - would 90% seem about right? 3) MERGE - would 20% seem about right? 4) Large Record Size - does 3276 seem right? 5) Group Size - should I be using 4096? I'm just a bit confused as to how to set these, I saw the formula to calculate the MINIMUM.MODULUS which is (record + id / 4096 or 2048) but I always get a lower number than my current modulus.. I also saw where it said to simply take your current modulus # and add 10-20% and set the MINIMUM.MODULUS based on that.. Based on the table above I'm just trying to get an idea of what these should be set at. Thanks, Chris From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:28:17 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Doug, When I do the math I come up with a different # (see below): File name .. TEST_FILE Pathname ... TEST_FILE File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 82850 current ( minimum 24, 104 empty, 26225 overflowed, 1441 badly ) Number of records .. 1157122 Large record size .. 2036 bytes Number of large records 576 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 449605632 bytes Total
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
The split load is not affecting anything here, since it is more than the actual load. What your overflow suggests is that you lower the split.load value to 70$% or below. You could go ahead and set the merge.load to an arbitrarily low number (1), and it will probably never do a merge, which would be the same as specifying a minimum.modulus equal to as large as it ever gets. The exception to this is during file creation clear.file, when the minimum.modulus value determines the initial disk allocation. Short of going to an arbitrarily large minimum.modulus, and a very low split.load, you are going to have some overflow (unless you have sequential keys like sized records). -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 12:54 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Using the formula below, and changing the split to 90% I get the following: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 103889 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 22249 overflowed, 1764 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 72% (actual) Total size . 519921664 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400591 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508497 bytes Unused space ... 211004384 bytes Total space for records 519913472 bytes How does this look in terms of performance? My Actual load went down 8% as well as some overflow but it looks like my load % is still high at 72% I'm wondering if I should raise the MINIMUM.MODULUS even more since I still have a decent amount of overflow and not many large records. Chris From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:21:16 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files (record + id / 4096 or 2048) You need to factor in overhead the split factor: (records + ids) * 1.1 * 1.25 / 4096(for 80%) If you use a 20% merge factor and a 80% split factor, the file will start merging unless you delete 60 percent of your records. If you use 90% split factor, you will have more overflowed groups. These numbers refer to the total amount of data in the file, not to any individual group. For records of the size that you have, I do not see any advantage to using a larger, 4096, group size. You will end up with twice the number of records per group vs 2048 (~ 13 vs ~ 7 ), and a little slower keyed access. -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 9:48 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 92776 current ( minimum 31, 89 empty, 28229 overflowed, 2485 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 500600832 bytes Total size of record data .. 287035391 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508449 bytes Unused space ... 192048800 bytes Total space for records 500592640 bytes Using the record above, how would I calculate the following? 1) MINIMUM.MODULUS (Is there a formula to use or should I add 20% to the current number)? 2) SPLIT - would 90% seem about right? 3) MERGE - would 20% seem about right? 4) Large Record Size - does 3276 seem right? 5) Group Size - should I be using 4096? I'm just a bit confused as to how to set these, I saw the formula to calculate the MINIMUM.MODULUS which is (record + id / 4096 or 2048) but I always get a lower number than my current modulus.. I also saw where it said to simply take your current modulus # and add 10-20% and set the MINIMUM.MODULUS based on that.. Based on the table above I'm just trying to get an idea of what these should be set at. Thanks, Chris From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:28:17 -0500 Subject: Re:
Re: [U2] UniVerse LIST statement question [not-secure]
There have been more than a few times when I wished that MV query was a little more extensible. On a couple of occasions I have created throwaway connectives as a means to pass flags to an i-type or a B correlative, but it would be nice if there were a keyword that flagged to just ignore everything after it on the line. Hmm, I never knew that EVAL needed to write to the dict on universe. Is that try on unidata as well? On Jul 3, 2012, at 12:47 PM, Charles Stevenson wrote: Ed is quite right. 1: I just did it for simplicity in the example. 2: @SENTENCE, without a wrapper: you have do get ReTrieve to ignore part of the sentence. I've never come up with a good way to do that other than via EVAL. Anyone? 3. EVAL: Yes, it is a way to pass run-time parameters! I tend to forget about it because I - personally - don't like it in production. EVAL means dictionaries can't be read-only. And they tend to permanently leave temporary I-descriptors scattered in the dicts if when something terminates abnormally. RetrieVe rudely spits the EVAL compilation report into the output, too. If you have multiple associated columns, if your usage gets fancy (that (future) option is a reason for this approach), then your EVAL may need ASSOC, ASSOC.WITH, MULTIVALUED keywords, besides AS, FMT, COL.HDG. Other than that, I love EVAL. On 7/3/2012 11:08 AM, Ed Clark wrote: There are 3 ways I can think of offhand to tell the subroutine what date range to use. I like #3 the best: 1: use common variables, which is what the example function MARKH does. The downside is that you have to assign the common variables before you run the query. 2: You could use @SENTENCE in the function and parse out the date range. That could be easy or hard depending on how many people write queries and what odd contortions of syntax they use. But both #1 and #2 could be simplified by writing a wrapper program. An example command line would look like: QLAUNCH 06/01/2012 06/30/2012 ~ LIST MYFILE INRANGE QLAUNCH parses arguments before the '~` delimiter and puts them into a common. The INRANGE attribute calls the function MARKH which uses the common. 3: use the function directly from the command line with EVAL: LIST MYFILE EVAL SUBR('MARKH','06/01/2012','06/30/2012') AS MYCOL COL.HDG WHATEVER FMT 11L It's wordier, but you have very fine-grained control over what comes out on the report. COL.HDG, and FMT are optional and AS is optional in this case. You would us it if you wanted to sort or break on the EVAL column. On Jul 3, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Charles Stevenson wrote: What Brian said, except don't replace LIST! Rather, write your subroutine to be called from an I-descriptors: MARKH 0001 FUNCTION MARKH( INARG ) 0002 COMMON /MARKH/ START.IDT, END.IDT, PREV.ID, VLIST 0003 * 0004 * Assumes common has been initialized properly before this function 0005 * is called from i-descriptors 0006 * 0007 IF @ID = PREV.ID ELSE 0008 IDTS = @RECORD 10 0009 VLIST = 0010 VMC = 0 0011 VMAX = DCOUNT( IDTS, @VM ) 0012 FOR V = 1 TO VMAX 0013 IDT = IDTS1,V 0014 IF IDT = START.IDT THEN IF IDT = END.IDT THEN VLIST-1 = V 0015 NEXT V 0016 END 0017 * 0018 OUTARG = 0019 MORE = LEN( VLIST ); * true/false 0020 LOOP WHILE MORE 0021 REMOVE V FROM VLIST SETTING MORE 0022 OUTARG1,-1 = INARG1, V 0023 REPEAT 0024 SETREM 0 ON VLIST 0025 * 0026 RETURN( OUTARG ) 0027END An example using it is below. It's more flexible and maintainable in the long run than tossing RETRIEVE altogether. (Actually, I do think it can be done with the mv-handling functions but an I-descriptor subroutine will be more maintainable.) Your sub should limits the output to the values you want. If every value is out of range, your subr returns null. It can be called for various associated fields, and the 1st time called for a given @ID it figures out the value range, and saves to labeled common what vals you want for that record. Subsequent calls to the sub, as long as @ID hasn't changed, gets the already calculated value range from common, and applies it to the field you pass it. The only trick is feeding your subroutine the date range you won't know until runtime.I don't know a good way to feed an I-descriptor command line parameters such as = 6/1/2012 = 6/30/2012 You'll need to set them in a control record or, better, in @USER1, @USER2, or in your labeled common before the LIST is executed. Use the I-descriptors that call your subroutine as output criteria and not WITH or WHEN selection criteria. The guts of the subr will do the selection limits. That may not be altogether clear. Here's an example. 1st the relevant dict entries then an example: DICT RTAG
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
I guess what I need to know is what's an acceptable % of overflow for a dynamic file? For example, when I change the SPLIT LOAD to 90% (while using the calculated min modulus) I'm still left with ~ 20% of overflow (see below). Is 20% overflow considered acceptable on average or should I keep tinkering with it to reach a lower overflow %? Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems the goal here is to REDUCE the overflow % while not creating too many modulus (groups). Chris File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 105715 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 21092 overflowed, 1452 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 70% (actual) Total size . 522260480 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400239 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 213343528 bytes Total space for records 522252288 bytes From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:10:43 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files The split load is not affecting anything here, since it is more than the actual load. What your overflow suggests is that you lower the split.load value to 70$% or below. You could go ahead and set the merge.load to an arbitrarily low number (1), and it will probably never do a merge, which would be the same as specifying a minimum.modulus equal to as large as it ever gets. The exception to this is during file creation clear.file, when the minimum.modulus value determines the initial disk allocation. Short of going to an arbitrarily large minimum.modulus, and a very low split.load, you are going to have some overflow (unless you have sequential keys like sized records). -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 12:54 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Using the formula below, and changing the split to 90% I get the following: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 103889 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 22249 overflowed, 1764 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 72% (actual) Total size . 519921664 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400591 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508497 bytes Unused space ... 211004384 bytes Total space for records 519913472 bytes How does this look in terms of performance? My Actual load went down 8% as well as some overflow but it looks like my load % is still high at 72% I'm wondering if I should raise the MINIMUM.MODULUS even more since I still have a decent amount of overflow and not many large records. Chris From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:21:16 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files (record + id / 4096 or 2048) You need to factor in overhead the split factor: (records + ids) * 1.1 * 1.25 / 4096(for 80%) If you use a 20% merge factor and a 80% split factor, the file will start merging unless you delete 60 percent of your records. If you use 90% split factor, you will have more overflowed groups. These numbers refer to the total amount of data in the file, not to any individual group. For records of the size that you have, I do not see any advantage to using a larger, 4096, group size. You will end up with twice the number of records per group vs 2048 (~ 13 vs ~ 7 ), and a little slower keyed access. -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 9:48 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
The actual load is 70% on your file. The split.load of 90 was set after the file was loaded. If you leave it at that value, and add another 100,000 records, your modulus will not grow, but the number of overflowed groups will. Perhaps you need to look at is as 80% not overflowed. Despite the output, I doubt that any of those overflows are that bad. -Rick On Jul 3, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Chris Austin cjausti...@hotmail.com wrote: I guess what I need to know is what's an acceptable % of overflow for a dynamic file? For example, when I change the SPLIT LOAD to 90% (while using the calculated min modulus) I'm still left with ~ 20% of overflow (see below). Is 20% overflow considered acceptable on average or should I keep tinkering with it to reach a lower overflow %? Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems the goal here is to REDUCE the overflow % while not creating too many modulus (groups). Chris File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 105715 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 21092 overflowed, 1452 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 70% (actual) Total size . 522260480 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400239 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 213343528 bytes Total space for records 522252288 bytes From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:10:43 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files The split load is not affecting anything here, since it is more than the actual load. What your overflow suggests is that you lower the split.load value to 70$% or below. You could go ahead and set the merge.load to an arbitrarily low number (1), and it will probably never do a merge, which would be the same as specifying a minimum.modulus equal to as large as it ever gets. The exception to this is during file creation clear.file, when the minimum.modulus value determines the initial disk allocation. Short of going to an arbitrarily large minimum.modulus, and a very low split.load, you are going to have some overflow (unless you have sequential keys like sized records). -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 12:54 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Using the formula below, and changing the split to 90% I get the following: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 103889 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 22249 overflowed, 1764 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 72% (actual) Total size . 519921664 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400591 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508497 bytes Unused space ... 211004384 bytes Total space for records 519913472 bytes How does this look in terms of performance? My Actual load went down 8% as well as some overflow but it looks like my load % is still high at 72% I'm wondering if I should raise the MINIMUM.MODULUS even more since I still have a decent amount of overflow and not many large records. Chris From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:21:16 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files (record + id / 4096 or 2048) You need to factor in overhead the split factor: (records + ids) * 1.1 * 1.25 / 4096(for 80%) If you use a 20% merge factor and a 80% split factor, the file will start merging unless you delete 60 percent of your records. If you use 90% split factor, you will have more overflowed groups. These numbers refer to the total amount of data in the file, not to any individual group. For records of the size that you have, I do not see any advantage to using a larger, 4096, group size. You will end up with twice the number of records per group vs 2048 (~ 13 vs ~ 7 ), and a little slower keyed access. -Rick -Original Message- From:
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
One rule of thumb is to make sure that you have an average of 10 or less items in each group. Going by that, you'd want a minimum mod of 130k or more. I've also noticed that files approach the sweet spot for minimizing overflow without having excessive empty groups when the total size is pretty nearly twice the data size. The goal can vary according to your situation. I'm personally not all that afraid of making the modulus a little too large, as overflow is a pretty bad performance hit (overflow means at least two disk reads to retrieve your data, badly means at least 2 extra disk reads, and I've seen files where that was thousands (this file isn't that bad, but 20% of your data is forcing at least one extra disk read). Empty groups contribute to overhead on a sequential search, so you'd want to consider how often you do a sequential search on a file - usually, that's a pretty inefficient way to retrieve data, but, again, your mileage may vary. To me, 20% is too much overflow, and 114 empty groups is trivial; much less than 0.2%. I'd be tempted to go to 23 as a minimum Mod, just to see what it looks like there. That'll give you an average of 6 records per group, not unreasonably shallow, and it's likely to be a while before you have to resize again. From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:23:23 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files I guess what I need to know is what's an acceptable % of overflow for a dynamic file? For example, when I change the SPLIT LOAD to 90% (while using the calculated min modulus) I'm still left with ~ 20% of overflow (see below). Is 20% overflow considered acceptable on average or should I keep tinkering with it to reach a lower overflow %? Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems the goal here is to REDUCE the overflow % while not creating too many modulus (groups). Chris File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 105715 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 21092 overflowed, 1452 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 70% (actual) Total size . 522260480 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400239 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 213343528 bytes Total space for records 522252288 bytes From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:10:43 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files The split load is not affecting anything here, since it is more than the actual load. What your overflow suggests is that you lower the split.load value to 70$% or below. You could go ahead and set the merge.load to an arbitrarily low number (1), and it will probably never do a merge, which would be the same as specifying a minimum.modulus equal to as large as it ever gets. The exception to this is during file creation clear.file, when the minimum.modulus value determines the initial disk allocation. Short of going to an arbitrarily large minimum.modulus, and a very low split.load, you are going to have some overflow (unless you have sequential keys like sized records). -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 12:54 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Using the formula below, and changing the split to 90% I get the following: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 103889 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 22249 overflowed, 1764 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 72% (actual) Total size . 519921664 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400591 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508497 bytes Unused space ... 211004384 bytes Total space for records 519913472 bytes How does this look in terms of performance? My Actual load went down 8% as well as some
Re: [U2] Is there any way to tell if I am in an EXECUTE level and CAPTURING is turned on?
I just noticed this in the help for QM's SYSTEM() 1000 Returns 1 if EXECUTE CAPTURING is in effect, 0 otherwise Checked if this was an undocumented feature that Martin had reproduced; but no, it doesn't work in Universe. Regards, Keith ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris From: dangf...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:57:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files One rule of thumb is to make sure that you have an average of 10 or less items in each group. Going by that, you'd want a minimum mod of 130k or more. I've also noticed that files approach the sweet spot for minimizing overflow without having excessive empty groups when the total size is pretty nearly twice the data size. The goal can vary according to your situation. I'm personally not all that afraid of making the modulus a little too large, as overflow is a pretty bad performance hit (overflow means at least two disk reads to retrieve your data, badly means at least 2 extra disk reads, and I've seen files where that was thousands (this file isn't that bad, but 20% of your data is forcing at least one extra disk read). Empty groups contribute to overhead on a sequential search, so you'd want to consider how often you do a sequential search on a file - usually, that's a pretty inefficient way to retrieve data, but, again, your mileage may vary. To me, 20% is too much overflow, and 114 empty groups is trivial; much less than 0.2%. I'd be tempted to go to 23 as a minimum Mod, just to see what it looks like there. That'll give you an average of 6 records per group, not unreasonably shallow, and it's likely to be a while before you have to resize again. From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:23:23 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files I guess what I need to know is what's an acceptable % of overflow for a dynamic file? For example, when I change the SPLIT LOAD to 90% (while using the calculated min modulus) I'm still left with ~ 20% of overflow (see below). Is 20% overflow considered acceptable on average or should I keep tinkering with it to reach a lower overflow %? Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems the goal here is to REDUCE the overflow % while not creating too many modulus (groups). Chris File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 105715 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 21092 overflowed, 1452 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 70% (actual) Total size . 522260480 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400239 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 213343528 bytes Total space for records 522252288 bytes From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:10:43 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files The split load is not affecting anything here, since it is more than the actual load. What your overflow suggests is that you lower the split.load value to 70$% or below. You could go ahead and set the merge.load to an arbitrarily low number (1), and it will probably never do a merge, which would be the same as specifying a minimum.modulus equal to as large as it ever gets. The exception to this is during file creation clear.file, when the minimum.modulus value determines the initial disk allocation. Short of going to an arbitrarily large minimum.modulus, and a very low split.load, you are going to have some overflow
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a full select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris From: dangf...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:57:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files One rule of thumb is to make sure that you have an average of 10 or less items in each group. Going by that, you'd want a minimum mod of 130k or more. I've also noticed that files approach the sweet spot for minimizing overflow without having excessive empty groups when the total size is pretty nearly twice the data size. The goal can vary according to your situation. I'm personally not all that afraid of making the modulus a little too large, as overflow is a pretty bad performance hit (overflow means at least two disk reads to retrieve your data, badly means at least 2 extra disk reads, and I've seen files where that was thousands (this file isn't that bad, but 20% of your data is forcing at least one extra disk read). Empty groups contribute to overhead on a sequential search, so you'd want to consider how often you do a sequential search on a file - usually, that's a pretty inefficient way to retrieve data, but, again, your mileage may vary. To me, 20% is too much overflow, and 114 empty groups is trivial; much less than 0.2%. I'd be tempted to go to 23 as a minimum Mod, just to see what it looks like there. That'll give you an average of 6 records per group, not unreasonably shallow, and it's likely to be a while before you have to resize again. From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:23:23 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files I guess what I need to know is what's an acceptable % of overflow for a dynamic file? For example, when I change the SPLIT LOAD to 90% (while using the calculated min modulus) I'm still left with ~ 20% of overflow (see below). Is 20% overflow considered acceptable on average or should I keep tinkering with it to reach a lower overflow %? Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems the goal here is to REDUCE the overflow % while not creating too many modulus (groups). Chris File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 105715 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 21092 overflowed, 1452 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 70% (actual) Total size . 522260480 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400239 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 213343528 bytes Total space for records 522252288 bytes From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:10:43 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files The split load is not affecting anything here, since it is more than the actual load. What your overflow suggests is that you lower the split.load value to 70$% or below. You could go ahead and set the merge.load to an arbitrarily low number (1), and it will
Re: [U2] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** UniVerse LIST statement question [not-secure]
You can do just about anything by calling a subroutine from an I-type dictionary item. On 3 July 2012 05:41, Mecki Foerthmann mec...@gmx.net wrote: Since we don't have outer joins I would build a work file starting with selecting all employees, then select the calls and merge them together in a loop. How you do it depends on how you want to present the data. If you're happy with showing the calls as multi values you can build the records that way and if you like one row per call you should probably have one row per call. Then report on the work file. That is the easiest way I can see to include employees who didn't make any calls. I can also think of a few approaches involving stored parameters and dictionaries or a dictionary in the employee file that builds the call info in a subroutine as multivalues using an index by employee on the calls file. In any case you will most likely need to base your report on the employees file not the calls. On 02/07/2012 14:53, Hennessey, Mark F. wrote: I need to do a UniVerse LIST statement that would only populate a column if the contents met certain criteria. For example, suppose we have a file with details of telephone usage and that 3 associated mulitvalued fields contain date call was made, duration and if the call was a toll call. Is it possible to limit the output of the date call made and associated columns to a date range without that being a select criteria? If I were to do something like: LIST CALLS EMP.NAME EMP.LOCATION WITH DATE.CALL GE 2012-06-01 AND WITH DATE.CALL LE 2012-06-30 DURATION TOLL WITH @ID EQ '123456' I would get zero record if employee 123456 did not make any calls in June. What I would like to see is the employer name and location returned with the date, duration and toll columns empty. I'm trying to do this in a LIST statement as it will be run by U2 Web Services (and for the time being a subroutine is off the table...) Any advice, or an authoritative NO, It can not be done would be greatly appreciated. Mark Hennessey State of Connecticut Department of Social Services Information Technology Services Child Support Systems Voice: 860-424-5261 Fax: 860-424-4813 CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: The information contained in this e-mail may be confidential and protected from general disclosure. If the recipient or reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or a person responsible to receive this e-mail for the intended recipient, please do not disseminate, distribute or copy it. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. We will take immediate and appropriate action to see to it that this mistake is corrected.[*LD*] __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- Kate Stanton Walstan Systems Ltd 4 Kelmarna Ave, Herne Bay, Auckland 1011, New Zealand Phone: + 64 9 360 5310 Mobile: + 64 21 400 486 Email: k...@walstan.com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
I should have said 60% more disk records, to be clear. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rick Nuckolls Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:24 PM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a full select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris From: dangf...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:57:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files One rule of thumb is to make sure that you have an average of 10 or less items in each group. Going by that, you'd want a minimum mod of 130k or more. I've also noticed that files approach the sweet spot for minimizing overflow without having excessive empty groups when the total size is pretty nearly twice the data size. The goal can vary according to your situation. I'm personally not all that afraid of making the modulus a little too large, as overflow is a pretty bad performance hit (overflow means at least two disk reads to retrieve your data, badly means at least 2 extra disk reads, and I've seen files where that was thousands (this file isn't that bad, but 20% of your data is forcing at least one extra disk read). Empty groups contribute to overhead on a sequential search, so you'd want to consider how often you do a sequential search on a file - usually, that's a pretty inefficient way to retrieve data, but, again, your mileage may vary. To me, 20% is too much overflow, and 114 empty groups is trivial; much less than 0.2%. I'd be tempted to go to 23 as a minimum Mod, just to see what it looks like there. That'll give you an average of 6 records per group, not unreasonably shallow, and it's likely to be a while before you have to resize again. From: cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:23:23 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files I guess what I need to know is what's an acceptable % of overflow for a dynamic file? For example, when I change the SPLIT LOAD to 90% (while using the calculated min modulus) I'm still left with ~ 20% of overflow (see below). Is 20% overflow considered acceptable on average or should I keep tinkering with it to reach a lower overflow %? Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems the goal here is to REDUCE the overflow % while not creating too many modulus (groups). Chris File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 105715 current ( minimum 103889, 114 empty, 21092 overflowed, 1452 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 70% (actual) Total size . 522260480 bytes Total size of record data .. 287400239 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 213343528 bytes Total space for records 522252288 bytes From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:10:43 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2]
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
This is why I'm confused.. Is the goal here to reduce 'overflow' or to keep the 'Total size' of the disk down? If the goal is to keep the total disk size down then it would appear you would want your actual load % a lot higher than 37%.. and then ignore 'some' of the overflow.. Chris But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a full select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
Disks get bigger much faster than the rate they get faster. So the overflow is the thing to minimize. -Original Message- From: Chris Austin cjausti...@hotmail.com To: u2-users u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Tue, Jul 3, 2012 2:38 pm Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files his is why I'm confused.. Is the goal here to reduce 'overflow' or to eep the 'Total size' of the disk down? If the goal is to keep the total disk size down then it would appear ou would want your actual load % a lot higher than 37%.. and then ignore 'some' f the overflow.. Chris But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a ull select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] n Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my ctual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the esults: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big actor. How does this look? Chris __ 2-Users mailing list 2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org ttp://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] RESIZE - dynamic files
37% is a very low load. Reading disk records takes much longer than parsing the records out of a disk record. With variable record size and moderately poor hashing, overflow is inevitable. So, do you want 80,000 extra groups, or 20,000 overflow buffers? I would go with the smaller number. But for the love of Knuth, do not set your split.load to 90% unless you have a perfectly hashed file with uniformly sized records. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:38 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files This is why I'm confused.. Is the goal here to reduce 'overflow' or to keep the 'Total size' of the disk down? If the goal is to keep the total disk size down then it would appear you would want your actual load % a lot higher than 37%.. and then ignore 'some' of the overflow.. Chris But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a full select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris ___ 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] RESIZE - dynamic files
Chris, This is why file-sizing is something that requires careful thought. As some of the other responders have indicated, sometimes you want to keep overflow to a minimum (because accessing individual records that are in overflow takes extra disk reads, which slow down your system, and adding new records to a group that is already in overflow will inevitably be slower than adding a new record to a group which is not in overflow), and sometimes you don't (eg if you have a file that is primarily read in a sequential fashion where you do a Basic SELECT, and then loop through the file reading every single record). Because most of the files that I have supported in my career have been read and written primarily as single-record reads, I have always chosen to minimize overflow as my default criteria, and only sized things for sequential reads when the file is rarely written, rarely read as anything but a 'read them all in no particular order' fashion, and that happens rarely in my experience. However, as other responders have written, 'your mileage may vary'! Look at how the file is used. Look at what resources you have. Then decide... Susan M. Lynch F. W. Davison Company, Inc. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: 07/03/2012 5:38 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files This is why I'm confused.. Is the goal here to reduce 'overflow' or to keep the 'Total size' of the disk down? If the goal is to keep the total disk size down then it would appear you would want your actual load % a lot higher than 37%.. and then ignore 'some' of the overflow.. Chris But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a full select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris ___ 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] RESIZE - dynamic files
I set the split load based on what Dan suggested: I'd take the merge down a little, to maybe 30% or even less, and maybe knock the split up a bit - say, 90% - to cut down on the splitting. I thought this would cut down on splitting. Is there a certain formula, or way to calculate the split.load? What should my SPLIT.LOAD be around, and how do you come up with that %? Chris From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 14:45:28 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files 37% is a very low load. Reading disk records takes much longer than parsing the records out of a disk record. With variable record size and moderately poor hashing, overflow is inevitable. So, do you want 80,000 extra groups, or 20,000 overflow buffers? I would go with the smaller number. But for the love of Knuth, do not set your split.load to 90% unless you have a perfectly hashed file with uniformly sized records. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:38 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files This is why I'm confused.. Is the goal here to reduce 'overflow' or to keep the 'Total size' of the disk down? If the goal is to keep the total disk size down then it would appear you would want your actual load % a lot higher than 37%.. and then ignore 'some' of the overflow.. Chris But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a full select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris ___ 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
[U2] Account.File.Stats ALL
When you execute the Account.File.Stats command in Universe, with the ALL directive, the code executes the following command to make it's selection SSELECT VOC WITH TYPE = F AND F2 NOT.MATCHING 'I_'... AND F2 NOT.MATCHING '../'... AND F2 NOT.MATCHING '..\'... AND F2 NOT.MATCHING '/'... AND F2 NOT.MATCHING '\'... AND F2 NOT.MATCHING 1A:'\'... AND F2 # . AND F2 # ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
Unless the minimum modulus is configured high enough to artificially lower the actual load, the actual load will rise to the designated split.load as the file grows. The split.load indicates nothing about the specific load of any given group; so if it is set to 90%, then on average, each group will be 90% full, and adding a (400byte) record to a group will send it into overflow, but since 400 bytes is a trivial percentage of your overall file load, many groups will be overflowed before the total load factor exceeds 90%. Okay, there is a slight distortion with the numbers there, but the idea is that all buckets are not loaded equally, so if the average is almost full the reality is many overflowed. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:52 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files I set the split load based on what Dan suggested: I'd take the merge down a little, to maybe 30% or even less, and maybe knock the split up a bit - say, 90% - to cut down on the splitting. I thought this would cut down on splitting. Is there a certain formula, or way to calculate the split.load? What should my SPLIT.LOAD be around, and how do you come up with that %? Chris From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 14:45:28 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files 37% is a very low load. Reading disk records takes much longer than parsing the records out of a disk record. With variable record size and moderately poor hashing, overflow is inevitable. So, do you want 80,000 extra groups, or 20,000 overflow buffers? I would go with the smaller number. But for the love of Knuth, do not set your split.load to 90% unless you have a perfectly hashed file with uniformly sized records. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:38 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files This is why I'm confused.. Is the goal here to reduce 'overflow' or to keep the 'Total size' of the disk down? If the goal is to keep the total disk size down then it would appear you would want your actual load % a lot higher than 37%.. and then ignore 'some' of the overflow.. Chris But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a full select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris ___ 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 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
Chris, Let's back way up. I take it your original question is a general one, not specific to one poorly performing problematic file. Is that right? If so, generally speaking, you just don't get a lot out of fine-tuning dynamic files. Tweaking the default parameters doesn't usually make a whole lot of difference. Several people have said something similar in this thread. Other than deciding which hashing algorithm, I generally use the defaults and only tweak things once the file proves problematic, which usually means slow I/O. When a problem erupts, look carefully at how that specific file is used, as Susan others have said. You might get hold of FitzgeraldLong's paper on how dynamic files work. If you understand the fundamentals, you'll understand how to attack your problem file, applying the ideas Rick others have talked about here. You may go several years without having to resort to that. Chuck Stevenson On 7/2/2012 2:22 PM, Chris Austin wrote: I was wondering if anyone had instructions on RESIZE with a dynamic file? For example I have a file called 'TEST_FILE' with the following: 01 ANALYZE.FILE TEST_FILE File name .. TEST_FILE Pathname ... TEST_FILE File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 83261 current ( minimum 31 ) Large record size .. 3267 bytes Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 450613248 bytes How do you calculate what the modulus and separation should be? I can't use HASH.HELP on a type 30 file to see the recommended settings so I was wondering how best you figure out the file RESIZE. Thanks, Chris ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
From the System Description manual: Important Considerations Dynamic files are meant to make file management easier for users. The default parameters are set so that most dynamic files work efficiently. If you decide to change the parameters of a dynamic file, keep the following considerations in mind: Use the SEQ.NUM hashing algorithm only when your record IDs are numeric, sequential, and consecutive. Nonconsecutive numbers should not be hashed using the SEQ.NUM hashing algorithm. Use a group size of 2 only if you expect the average record size to be larger than 1000 bytes. If your record size is larger than 2000 bytes, consider using a nonhashed file—type 1 or 19. Large record size should generally not be changed. Storing the data of a large record in the overflow buffer causes that data not to be included in the split and merge calculations. Also, the extra data length does not slow access to subsequent records. By choosing a large record size of 0%, all the records are considered large. In this case, record IDs can be accessed extremely quickly by commands such as SELECT, but access to the actual data is much less efficient. A small split load causes less data to be stored in each group buffer, resulting in faster access time and less overflow at the expense of requiring extra memory. A large split load causes more data to be stored in each group buffer, resulting in better use of memory at the expense of slower access time and more overflow. A split load of 100% disables splits. The gap between merge load and split load should be large enough so that splits and merges do not occur too frequently. The split and merge processes take a significant amount of processing time. If you make the merge load too small, memory usage can be very poor. Also, selection time is increased when record IDs are distributed in more groups than are needed. A merge load of 0% disables merges. Consider increasing the minimum modulo if you intend to add a lot of initial data to the file. Much data-entry time can be saved by avoiding the initial splits that can occur if you enter a lot of initial data. You may want to readjust this value after -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 3:34 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Chris, Let's back way up. I take it your original question is a general one, not specific to one poorly performing problematic file. Is that right? If so, generally speaking, you just don't get a lot out of fine-tuning dynamic files. Tweaking the default parameters doesn't usually make a whole lot of difference. Several people have said something similar in this thread. Other than deciding which hashing algorithm, I generally use the defaults and only tweak things once the file proves problematic, which usually means slow I/O. When a problem erupts, look carefully at how that specific file is used, as Susan others have said. You might get hold of FitzgeraldLong's paper on how dynamic files work. If you understand the fundamentals, you'll understand how to attack your problem file, applying the ideas Rick others have talked about here. You may go several years without having to resort to that. Chuck Stevenson On 7/2/2012 2:22 PM, Chris Austin wrote: I was wondering if anyone had instructions on RESIZE with a dynamic file? For example I have a file called 'TEST_FILE' with the following: 01 ANALYZE.FILE TEST_FILE File name .. TEST_FILE Pathname ... TEST_FILE File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 83261 current ( minimum 31 ) Large record size .. 3267 bytes Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 80% (split), 50% (merge) and 80% (actual) Total size . 450613248 bytes How do you calculate what the modulus and separation should be? I can't use HASH.HELP on a type 30 file to see the recommended settings so I was wondering how best you figure out the file RESIZE. Thanks, Chris ___ 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] Running XLr8 Tools inside U2 DBTools new Eclipse release
I don't have BDT or other Rocket tools installed to confirm, but would specifying the same -data workspacepath in the arguments for each achieve what you're after ? (via: http://help.eclipse.org/indigo/index.jsp?topic=%2Forg.eclipse.platform.doc.user%2Ftasks%2Frunning_eclipse.htm) Regards, Brian. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Doug Averch Sent: Wednesday, 4 July 2012 3:23 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Running XLr8 Tools inside U2 DBTools new Eclipse release Hi Dan and others: I finished testing all of the Rocket tools. Turns out the only one that really works as a plug-in platform is BDT for U2logic plug-ins. The other products are crippled versions of Eclipse with limited menus by design. Another big problem is that Rocket's Eclipse products do not share work spaces, so if you start BDT your work space is in that directory. If you start U2Admin the work space is in that directory. Unfortunately this situation is very messy for U2logic, a Rocket VAR, to support. I'm going to have fun explaining this to the first client that asks why the programs don't share the server names. Regards, Doug www.u2logic.com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- Message protected by DealerGuard: e-mail anti-virus, anti-spam and content filtering. http://www.pentanasolutions.com Click here to report this message as spam: https://login.mailguard.com.au/report/1F4dy0mK0d/4ZdT5DKh528rfiCd3YgdAP/0.204 This email and any attachments to it are confidential. You must not use, disclose or act on the email if you are not the intended recipient. Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Running XLr8 Tools inside U2 DBTools new Eclipse release
I think my point go lost in all of the words. Rocket is delivering Eclipse plug-ins that are not first class. BDT has the menu item File-Switch Workspace, but the others Eclipse products have been stripped of features. Sure I can change the u2admin.ini to reference another work space. Did I jump back to 1990's to do Windows ini files configurations? I guess must have and did not remember the trip. I'm trying and I hope others as well to spread the word that the U2 world has progressed from TCL/ECL and AE/ED world to first class tools. I'm not saying that these new tools won't have bugs or things that can be enhanced. I'm saying if you strip out the standard features that make these tools first class, then all us using them are getting short changed. Regards, Doug www.u2logic.com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[U2] Exiting UniData
Hi John, I'm on an SB+ site on Universe which is completely unrelated to Epicor. Our QUIT is an exact copy of SH.OFF, which is a local catalogue pointer to the program code. I believe SH.OFF tidies up various SB+ stuff and then chains to OFF, and that this is the standard behaviour of SB+ Regards, Keith ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files
I would suggest that then actual goal is to achieve maximum performance for your system, so knowing HOW the file is used on a daily basis can also influence decisions. Disk is a cheap commodity, so having some wastage in file utilization shouldn't factor. Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage Better by Design! -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Wednesday, 4 July 2012 7:38 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files This is why I'm confused.. Is the goal here to reduce 'overflow' or to keep the 'Total size' of the disk down? If the goal is to keep the total disk size down then it would appear you would want your actual load % a lot higher than 37%.. and then ignore 'some' of the overflow.. Chris But the total size of your file is up 60%. Reading in 60% more records in a full select of the file is going to be much slower than a few more overflows. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Chris Austin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 2:15 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] RESIZE - dynamic files Dan, I changed the MINIMUM.MODULUS to the value of 23 as you suggested and my Actual Load has really gone down (as well as overflow). See below for the results: File name .. GENACCTRN_POSTED Pathname ... GENACCTRN_POSTED File type .. DYNAMIC File style and revision 32BIT Revision 12 Hashing Algorithm .. GENERAL No. of groups (modulus) 23 current ( minimum 23, 5263 empty, 3957 overflowed, 207 badly ) Number of records .. 1290469 Large record size .. 3267 bytes Number of large records 180 Group size . 4096 bytes Load factors ... 90% (split), 50% (merge) and 37% (actual) Total size . 836235264 bytes Total size of record data .. 287394719 bytes Total size of record IDs ... 21508521 bytes Unused space ... 527323832 bytes Total space for records 836227072 bytes My overflow is now @ 2% My Load is @ 37% (actual) granted my empty groups are now up to almost 3% but I hope that won't be a big factor. How does this look? Chris ___ 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] RESIZE - dynamic files
Doug may have had a key bounce in his input Let's do the math: 258687736 (Record Size) 192283300 (Key Size) The key size is actually 19283300 in Chris' figures Regarding 68,063 being less than the current modulus of 82,850. I think the answer may lie in the splitting process. As I understand it, the first time a split occurs group 1 is split and its contents are split between new group 1 and new group 2. All the other groups effectively get 1 added to their number. The next split is group 3 (which was 2) into 3 and 4 and so forth. A pointer is kept to say where the next split will take place and also to help sort out how to adjust the algorithm to identify which group matches a given key. Based on this, if you started with 1000 groups, by the time you have split the 500th time you will have 1500 groups. The first 1000 will be relatively empty, the last 500 will probably be overflowed, but not terribly badly. By the time you get to the 1000th split, you will have 2000 groups and they will, one hopes, be quite reasonably spread with very little overflow. So I expect the average access times would drift up and down in a cycle. The cycle time would get longer as the file gets bigger but the worst time would be roughly the the same each cycle. Given the power of two introduced into the algorithm by the before/after the split thing, I wonder if there is such a need to start off with a prime? Regards, Keith PS I'm getting a bit Tony^H^H^H^Hverbose nowadays. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users