Re: [U2] Running total
Hi,
As far as I know, the only way to do this in U2 is to use either a common
variable or one of the @USERn variables in a subroutine to
accumulate the result. Handling multi-values is not hard (as below). Getting
this to work for breakpoint lines is a bit more
awkward.
For example, using UniVerse's demonstration sales database (INITIALIZE.DEMO), I
can create an I-type named ACCUM that reads
I
subr('ACCUMULATE', ITEM.TOTAL)
MD2
Cumulative
8R
M
BOUGHT
and a program catalogued as ACCUMULATE
function accumulate(item)
common /total/tot
if @ni = 1 then tot = 0
x = ''
n = dcount(item, @vm)
for i = 1 to n
tot += item1,i
x1,i = tot
next i
return (x)
end
I can then do
LIST ORDERS PROD.NO SELL QTY ITEM.TOTAL ACCUM
@ID.. Product No Sell. Qty. Item Total Cumulative
10002 605 $40.00 1 $40.00 40.00
501 $5.00 1 $5.00 45.00
502 $5.00 1 $5.00 50.00
504 $5.00 1 $5.00 55.00
10006 112 $6.00 3 $18.00 73.00
10004 704$115.00 1 $115.00 188.00
301 $10.00 9 $90.00 278.00
10005 502 $5.00 9 $45.00 323.00
10003 202 $5.0010 $50.00 373.00
204 $5.0010 $50.00 423.00
10001 112 $6.00 7 $42.00 465.00
418 $27.00 4 $108.00 573.00
704$115.00 1 $115.00 688.00
10007 301 $10.00 3 $30.00 718.00
Maybe Rocket can be persuaded to implement the CUMULATIVE field modifier
keyword that we have in QM to make this trivial
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 Wjhonson
Sent: 02 July 2013 01:36
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Running total
Teach me again how to do a running total in a Access/Recall/English report.
I haven't done one in years, but I seem to recall that it's possible.
___
U2-Users mailing list
mailto:U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
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 total
LIST NEWACC BYTES EVAL BYTES+@2;@
VOC. Bytes.. BYTES+@2;@
ADDX 47 47
CHDIR 53100
ENDPAGE 54154
LNUM 64218
On 7/2/2013 11:29 AM, Martin Phillips wrote:
Hi,
As far as I know, the only way to do this in U2 is to use either a common
variable or one of the @USERn variables in a subroutine to
accumulate the result. Handling multi-values is not hard (as below). Getting
this to work for breakpoint lines is a bit more
awkward.
For example, using UniVerse's demonstration sales database (INITIALIZE.DEMO), I
can create an I-type named ACCUM that reads
I
subr('ACCUMULATE', ITEM.TOTAL)
MD2
Cumulative
8R
M
BOUGHT
and a program catalogued as ACCUMULATE
function accumulate(item)
common /total/tot
if @ni = 1 then tot = 0
x = ''
n = dcount(item, @vm)
for i = 1 to n
tot += item1,i
x1,i = tot
next i
return (x)
end
I can then do
LIST ORDERS PROD.NO SELL QTY ITEM.TOTAL ACCUM
@ID.. Product No Sell. Qty. Item Total Cumulative
10002 605 $40.00 1 $40.00 40.00
501 $5.00 1 $5.00 45.00
502 $5.00 1 $5.00 50.00
504 $5.00 1 $5.00 55.00
10006 112 $6.00 3 $18.00 73.00
10004 704$115.00 1 $115.00 188.00
301 $10.00 9 $90.00 278.00
10005 502 $5.00 9 $45.00 323.00
10003 202 $5.0010 $50.00 373.00
204 $5.0010 $50.00 423.00
10001 112 $6.00 7 $42.00 465.00
418 $27.00 4 $108.00 573.00
704$115.00 1 $115.00 688.00
10007 301 $10.00 3 $30.00 718.00
Maybe Rocket can be persuaded to implement the CUMULATIVE field modifier
keyword that we have in QM to make this trivial
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 Wjhonson
Sent: 02 July 2013 01:36
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Running total
Teach me again how to do a running total in a Access/Recall/English report.
I haven't done one in years, but I seem to recall that it's possible.
___
U2-Users mailing list
mailto:U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
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] Running total
Hmmm. Simpler than my approach but it fails with multivalues or with queries that have other I-types in them. Martin -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson Sent: 02 July 2013 13:07 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Running total LIST NEWACC BYTES EVAL BYTES+@2;@ VOC. Bytes.. BYTES+@2;@ ADDX 47 47 CHDIR 53100 ENDPAGE 54154 LNUM 64218 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Running total
I also believe you have to presort before you do the LIST. Otherwise I think it does the totaling first, Then it does the sort. George -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Martin Phillips Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 8:49 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Running total Hmmm. Simpler than my approach but it fails with multivalues or with queries that have other I-types in them. Martin -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson Sent: 02 July 2013 13:07 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Running total LIST NEWACC BYTES EVAL BYTES+@2;@ VOC. Bytes.. BYTES+@2;@ ADDX 47 47 CHDIR 53100 ENDPAGE 54154 LNUM 64218 ___ 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] SAN?
Morning, I am curious if anybody has UniData Accounts running off a Shared Enterprise SAN? We currently have an Enterprise SAN for our VMware Environment and would like to put a handful of UniData Test Accounts on it. We are using UniData 7.2 on an IBM P6 running AIX 6.1, the SAN would be 4GB Fiber Attached. Thoughts? Ty Haller | Lead Administrator - System Services | SEFCU | thal...@sefcu.com 700 Patroon Creek Blvd. Albany, NY 12206 | Phone: 518-464-5210 | Fax: 518-464-5209 This message may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[U2] Auto Save and Auto Compare in XLr8Editor version 3.8.0 [ad]
We are pleased to announce that we have added the following features to our XLr8Editor 1. An option to auto save your local source code every so many minutes to the database version. 2. An option to auto compare your local source code every so many minutes to the database version. 3. All XLr8 Tools have been tested for the new release of Eclipse version 4.3 called Kepler. We are real proud of our team of Java programmers have been able to fix and enhance our tools with the tremendous pressure of releases every 3 to 4 weeks. We would, also, like to thank of our users for the directing us to filling in the XLr8 products with needed enhancements. Regards, Doug www.u2logic.com Tools and Applications for the Universe and Unidata shops ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] SAN?
Ty, We have used a NetApps SAN for a number of years with Solaris for Universe data. (For Universe) there is the obvious tweak of allowing direct access to NFS, and depending on the type of SAN, there are probably some mount options to optimize the throughput. It also helps to have a fair amount of memory for file caching, but it works great and provides many important advantages. A couple of caveats: Do not allow access to snapshots through the same NFS mount as the primary data. For NetApps, at least, the snapshot has the same inode as the live data file, so the snapshot tree must be mounted as a separate device to avoid confusing (Universe) with conflicting file headers and data. NFS mounts work fine, as long as access to a particular directory tree is managed by a single data server. Oracle supports this same configuration, though I do not think that Rocket has much experience with it. Although difficult, it is possible to install Universe a SAN, and then run it on a VM, which means that you can snapshot almost all of the UV environment at once! Rick Nuckolls Lynden Inc -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Ty Haller Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 6:15 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: [U2] SAN? Morning, I am curious if anybody has UniData Accounts running off a Shared Enterprise SAN? We currently have an Enterprise SAN for our VMware Environment and would like to put a handful of UniData Test Accounts on it. We are using UniData 7.2 on an IBM P6 running AIX 6.1, the SAN would be 4GB Fiber Attached. Thoughts? Ty Haller | Lead Administrator - System Services | SEFCU | thal...@sefcu.com 700 Patroon Creek Blvd. Albany, NY 12206 | Phone: 518-464-5210 | Fax: 518-464-5209 This message may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ 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 total
Martin, True, you might need mv-handling subrs for mv fields. Which are always fun. (I hate to concede that correlatives might actually be better at something, but I do wish there were a way to write a variation of an I-descriptor where you could code single value logic, with the value looping implied, like *cough* correlatives do. There, I said it. It's in writing. On the internet.) But, Martin, the method does NOT fail if you have multiple I-descriptors. It did on PI, but not on UV. UV uses seperate @-buffers for each I-descriptor, insulating i-descriptors from each other. I don't think the method works on UD at all. Tongue firmly in cheek, where it still hurts from biting it praising correlatives: The downside is you can't do fancy things like pass information between I-descriptors via @-buffers like you could on PI. That kind of i-descriptor hotshot programming was excellent for job security because no one else had a hope of deciphering it. When I was young I explored the outer limits before settling on a reasonable mix of when to write a subroutine and when to do everything in native I-descriptor line 2. I wonder how long it took Lynden to undo some of that after I left? (Be gentle now, Rick.) George's remarks about presorting are spot-on. For breakpoints: @NB, TOTAL() with keyword CALC are your friends. They should be in everyone's RetrieVe uniQuery repertoire. Chuck On 7/2/2013 3:48 PM, Martin Phillips wrote: Hmmm. Simpler than my approach but it fails with multivalues or with queries that have other I-types in them. Martin -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson Sent: 02 July 2013 13:07 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Running total LIST NEWACC BYTES EVAL BYTES+@2;@ VOC. Bytes.. BYTES+@2;@ ADDX 47 47 CHDIR 53100 ENDPAGE 54154 LNUM 64218 ___ 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] SAN?
Thanks. I'm aware of the advantages. I was more concerned with the IO requirements and how that would impact shared storage. Ty Haller SEFCU Lead Administrator - System Services thal...@sefcu.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rick Nuckolls Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 11:13 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? Ty, We have used a NetApps SAN for a number of years with Solaris for Universe data. (For Universe) there is the obvious tweak of allowing direct access to NFS, and depending on the type of SAN, there are probably some mount options to optimize the throughput. It also helps to have a fair amount of memory for file caching, but it works great and provides many important advantages. A couple of caveats: Do not allow access to snapshots through the same NFS mount as the primary data. For NetApps, at least, the snapshot has the same inode as the live data file, so the snapshot tree must be mounted as a separate device to avoid confusing (Universe) with conflicting file headers and data. NFS mounts work fine, as long as access to a particular directory tree is managed by a single data server. Oracle supports this same configuration, though I do not think that Rocket has much experience with it. Although difficult, it is possible to install Universe a SAN, and then run it on a VM, which means that you can snapshot almost all of the UV environment at once! Rick Nuckolls Lynden Inc -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Ty Haller Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 6:15 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: [U2] SAN? Morning, I am curious if anybody has UniData Accounts running off a Shared Enterprise SAN? We currently have an Enterprise SAN for our VMware Environment and would like to put a handful of UniData Test Accounts on it. We are using UniData 7.2 on an IBM P6 running AIX 6.1, the SAN would be 4GB Fiber Attached. Thoughts? Ty Haller | Lead Administrator - System Services | SEFCU | thal...@sefcu.com 700 Patroon Creek Blvd. Albany, NY 12206 | Phone: 518-464-5210 | Fax: 518- 464-5209 This message may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ 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 may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] SAN?
With Universe, its a different IO pattern than most system administrators are familiar with, especially when you put an entire account on non-local storage. In particular things like the PH folder (from phantoms) and COMO files from traces. Files are frequently opened and closed, created and deleted. These operations are far more expensive on non-local storage. File locking is particularly problematic on NFS. The pattern may vary considerably based on what your application code actually does. I would highly recommend using analysis tools to take a DETAILED picture of what your IO pattern looks like today, and then show it to the vendor of your SAN and make sure its being tuned properly to handle it. When I say detailed, what I mean is looking at all of the metrics like frequency of operations (open,close,write,delete), the latency of those operations, disk queue length, etc and not just the relative amount of read/write. The most common cause of poor disk performance is taking too simplistic of a view when setting requirements. This is especially true in shared environments. While shared often is cheaper and easier to maintain, this is frequently accompanied by decreased performance when the applications that are sharing the storage have substantially different IO patterns. *Aaron Titus* Senior Software Engineer F.W. Davison Company, Inc. 508-747-7261 x245 ati...@fwdco.com On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Ty Haller thal...@sefcu.com wrote: Thanks. I'm aware of the advantages. I was more concerned with the IO requirements and how that would impact shared storage. Ty Haller SEFCU Lead Administrator - System Services thal...@sefcu.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rick Nuckolls Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 11:13 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? Ty, We have used a NetApps SAN for a number of years with Solaris for Universe data. (For Universe) there is the obvious tweak of allowing direct access to NFS, and depending on the type of SAN, there are probably some mount options to optimize the throughput. It also helps to have a fair amount of memory for file caching, but it works great and provides many important advantages. A couple of caveats: Do not allow access to snapshots through the same NFS mount as the primary data. For NetApps, at least, the snapshot has the same inode as the live data file, so the snapshot tree must be mounted as a separate device to avoid confusing (Universe) with conflicting file headers and data. NFS mounts work fine, as long as access to a particular directory tree is managed by a single data server. Oracle supports this same configuration, though I do not think that Rocket has much experience with it. Although difficult, it is possible to install Universe a SAN, and then run it on a VM, which means that you can snapshot almost all of the UV environment at once! Rick Nuckolls Lynden Inc -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Ty Haller Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 6:15 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: [U2] SAN? Morning, I am curious if anybody has UniData Accounts running off a Shared Enterprise SAN? We currently have an Enterprise SAN for our VMware Environment and would like to put a handful of UniData Test Accounts on it. We are using UniData 7.2 on an IBM P6 running AIX 6.1, the SAN would be 4GB Fiber Attached. Thoughts? Ty Haller | Lead Administrator - System Services | SEFCU | thal...@sefcu.com 700 Patroon Creek Blvd. Albany, NY 12206 | Phone: 518-464-5210 | Fax: 518- 464-5209 This message may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ 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 may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ U2-Users mailing list
Re: [U2] Running total
I was on a project where out of fourteen PICK programmers two of us could fix I descriptors. (Yes I was one of the two) Just an aside I found particularly interesting. -Original Message- From: Charles Stevenson stevenson.c...@gmail.com To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Tue, Jul 2, 2013 10:08 am Subject: Re: [U2] Running total Martin, True, you might need mv-handling subrs for mv fields. Which are always fun. (I hate to concede that correlatives might actually be better at something, but I do wish there were a way to write a variation of an I-descriptor where you could code single value logic, with the value looping implied, like *cough* correlatives do. There, I said it. It's in writing. On the internet.) But, Martin, the method does NOT fail if you have multiple I-descriptors. It did on PI, but not on UV. UV uses seperate @-buffers for each I-descriptor, insulating i-descriptors from each other. I don't think the method works on UD at all. Tongue firmly in cheek, where it still hurts from biting it praising correlatives: The downside is you can't do fancy things like pass information between I-descriptors via @-buffers like you could on PI. That kind of i-descriptor hotshot programming was excellent for job security because no one else had a hope of deciphering it. When I was young I explored the outer limits before settling on a reasonable mix of when to write a subroutine and when to do everything in native I-descriptor line 2. I wonder how long it took Lynden to undo some of that after I left? (Be gentle now, Rick.) George's remarks about presorting are spot-on. For breakpoints: @NB, TOTAL() with keyword CALC are your friends. They should be in everyone's RetrieVe uniQuery repertoire. Chuck On 7/2/2013 3:48 PM, Martin Phillips wrote: Hmmm. Simpler than my approach but it fails with multivalues or with queries that have other I-types in them. Martin -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson Sent: 02 July 2013 13:07 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Running total LIST NEWACC BYTES EVAL BYTES+@2;@ VOC. Bytes.. BYTES+@2;@ ADDX 47 47 CHDIR 53100 ENDPAGE 54154 LNUM 64218 ___ 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] SAN?
+1 to Aaron. Rocket Professional Services can assist you with this Ty. Aside from file opens, locking and the such, a lot of U2 based applications result in a higher frequency of smaller sized reads and writes than typical SANs are configured for. Moving a working database (any database, MV or not) to a SAN isn't something that should be undertaken unless you have someone who really knows what they are doing. A SAN's impact on I/O is much more complex than people generally realize and this can result in a horrible experience for applications that are highly sensitive to I/O properties such as latency and throughput. Regards, Dan McGrath Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab Rocket Software 4600 South Ulster Street · Suite 1100 · Denver, CO 80237 · USA T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W: u2.rocketsoftware.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Titus Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 12:05 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? With Universe, its a different IO pattern than most system administrators are familiar with, especially when you put an entire account on non-local storage. In particular things like the PH folder (from phantoms) and COMO files from traces. Files are frequently opened and closed, created and deleted. These operations are far more expensive on non-local storage. File locking is particularly problematic on NFS. The pattern may vary considerably based on what your application code actually does. I would highly recommend using analysis tools to take a DETAILED picture of what your IO pattern looks like today, and then show it to the vendor of your SAN and make sure its being tuned properly to handle it. When I say detailed, what I mean is looking at all of the metrics like frequency of operations (open,close,write,delete), the latency of those operations, disk queue length, etc and not just the relative amount of read/write. The most common cause of poor disk performance is taking too simplistic of a view when setting requirements. This is especially true in shared environments. While shared often is cheaper and easier to maintain, this is frequently accompanied by decreased performance when the applications that are sharing the storage have substantially different IO patterns. *Aaron Titus* Senior Software Engineer F.W. Davison Company, Inc. 508-747-7261 x245 ati...@fwdco.com On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Ty Haller thal...@sefcu.com wrote: Thanks. I'm aware of the advantages. I was more concerned with the IO requirements and how that would impact shared storage. Ty Haller SEFCU Lead Administrator - System Services thal...@sefcu.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rick Nuckolls Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 11:13 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? Ty, We have used a NetApps SAN for a number of years with Solaris for Universe data. (For Universe) there is the obvious tweak of allowing direct access to NFS, and depending on the type of SAN, there are probably some mount options to optimize the throughput. It also helps to have a fair amount of memory for file caching, but it works great and provides many important advantages. A couple of caveats: Do not allow access to snapshots through the same NFS mount as the primary data. For NetApps, at least, the snapshot has the same inode as the live data file, so the snapshot tree must be mounted as a separate device to avoid confusing (Universe) with conflicting file headers and data. NFS mounts work fine, as long as access to a particular directory tree is managed by a single data server. Oracle supports this same configuration, though I do not think that Rocket has much experience with it. Although difficult, it is possible to install Universe a SAN, and then run it on a VM, which means that you can snapshot almost all of the UV environment at once! Rick Nuckolls Lynden Inc -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Ty Haller Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 6:15 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: [U2] SAN? Morning, I am curious if anybody has UniData Accounts running off a Shared Enterprise SAN? We currently have an Enterprise SAN for our VMware Environment and would like to put a handful of UniData Test Accounts on it. We are using UniData 7.2 on an IBM P6 running AIX 6.1, the SAN would be 4GB Fiber Attached. Thoughts? Ty Haller | Lead Administrator - System Services | SEFCU | thal...@sefcu.com 700 Patroon Creek Blvd. Albany, NY 12206 | Phone: 518-464-5210 | Fax: 518- 464-5209 This message may
Re: [U2] SAN?
Ty, We have run 2 good sized Solaris boxes and 1 medium one over paired 1Gb switches for a long time ~ 5-600 users, thousands of files. Bandwidth is not a problem. We do run a separate network for SAN access from the servers. As a practical matter, this works. We are upgrading the switches to 10Gb, but we are by no means saturated. Solaris supports an llock or local lock option on NFS mounts which circumvents some of the performance issues mentioned in Aaron's message. I think that there is a similar solution for Linux boxes. rw,bg,vers=3,proto=tcp,hard,intr,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,llock This may not apply with your SAN. But if you can move some stuff over and test it, it is definitely worth the effort. Is NFS slower that a local disk? Likely so, right up until you have a disk failure, have to restore from tape instead of a snapshot, or fsck 500 Gigs. Is performance very good anyway? Yes. If a SAN can handle the average Microsoft product output, U2's text based data cannot be all that difficult. (hello world in msword is worth 5 groups in UV.) I apologize for the evangelical bent. There are doubtlessly architectural solutions other than NFS mounts, and some may be appropriate to your hardware and applications. NFS can be quite simple and surprisingly robust. -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Ty Haller Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 10:50 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? Thanks. I'm aware of the advantages. I was more concerned with the IO requirements and how that would impact shared storage. Ty Haller SEFCU Lead Administrator - System Services thal...@sefcu.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rick Nuckolls Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 11:13 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? Ty, We have used a NetApps SAN for a number of years with Solaris for Universe data. (For Universe) there is the obvious tweak of allowing direct access to NFS, and depending on the type of SAN, there are probably some mount options to optimize the throughput. It also helps to have a fair amount of memory for file caching, but it works great and provides many important advantages. A couple of caveats: Do not allow access to snapshots through the same NFS mount as the primary data. For NetApps, at least, the snapshot has the same inode as the live data file, so the snapshot tree must be mounted as a separate device to avoid confusing (Universe) with conflicting file headers and data. NFS mounts work fine, as long as access to a particular directory tree is managed by a single data server. Oracle supports this same configuration, though I do not think that Rocket has much experience with it. Although difficult, it is possible to install Universe a SAN, and then run it on a VM, which means that you can snapshot almost all of the UV environment at once! Rick Nuckolls Lynden Inc -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Ty Haller Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 6:15 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: [U2] SAN? Morning, I am curious if anybody has UniData Accounts running off a Shared Enterprise SAN? We currently have an Enterprise SAN for our VMware Environment and would like to put a handful of UniData Test Accounts on it. We are using UniData 7.2 on an IBM P6 running AIX 6.1, the SAN would be 4GB Fiber Attached. Thoughts? Ty Haller | Lead Administrator - System Services | SEFCU | thal...@sefcu.com 700 Patroon Creek Blvd. Albany, NY 12206 | Phone: 518-464-5210 | Fax: 518- 464-5209 This message may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ 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 may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ U2-Users mailing list
Re: [U2] Running total
Here is what I use: SUBROUTINE RUNNING_TOTAL(CUR.TOT, AM.PTR, AMT, RESET.DATA) * RUNNING_TOTAL Keeps a Running Total for Reports * by David A. Green -- 9/12/01 * COMMON /RUNTOT/ RUNTOT.REC(10) * EQUATE RUNTOT.FLAG TO RUNTOT.REC(1) EQUATE RUNTOT.TOTS TO RUNTOT.REC(2) EQUATE RUNTOT.LAST TO RUNTOT.REC(3) * TEST.FLAG = @DATE:@TIME * IF TEST.FLAG # RUNTOT.FLAG THEN RUNTOT.FLAG = TEST.FLAG RUNTOT.TOTS = RUNTOT.LAST = END * IF RESET.DATA # RUNTOT.LASTAM.PTR THEN RUNTOT.LASTAM.PTR = RESET.DATA RUNTOT.TOTSAM.PTR = 0 END * RUNTOT.TOTSAM.PTR += AMT CUR.TOT = RUNTOT.TOTSAM.PTR * RETURN Your formula for the I-Descriptor is: SUBR(RUNNING_TOTAL, n, Dict_Name, Reset_Dict_Name) Where n is a unique number for the Query statement, so you can have more than one running total per query. Dict_Name is the Dictionary Name to use for Totalling. Reset_Dict_Name is the Dictionary Name for 'Zeroing out' the Totals when it changes values. If you don't wish to 'Zero out' the totals then use . Note: The reset option only works on presorted data! Technical: Running Total supports Multi-Values. For optimal performance use smaller unique numbers like 1, 2, etc. David A. Green (480) 813-1725 DAG Consulting -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Wjhonson Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 5:36 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Running total Teach me again how to do a running total in a Access/Recall/English report. I haven't done one in years, but I seem to recall that it's possible. ___ 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] SAN?
Universe tends to make it's IO requests in 4K blocks, so you may want to make sure you're not sharing spindles with things like sharepoint, where a typical disk read request is more like 500K. You could end up with a 4K read waiting on something 100 times larger as a regular thing. In AIX, it's a great idea to increase RAM so that your cache hit rate is very high. With the lrud approach, you can get very high %'s. From: r...@lynden.com To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 13:12:06 -0700 Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? Ty, We have run 2 good sized Solaris boxes and 1 medium one over paired 1Gb switches for a long time ~ 5-600 users, thousands of files. Bandwidth is not a problem. We do run a separate network for SAN access from the servers. As a practical matter, this works. We are upgrading the switches to 10Gb, but we are by no means saturated. Solaris supports an llock or local lock option on NFS mounts which circumvents some of the performance issues mentioned in Aaron's message. I think that there is a similar solution for Linux boxes. rw,bg,vers=3,proto=tcp,hard,intr,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,llock This may not apply with your SAN. But if you can move some stuff over and test it, it is definitely worth the effort. Is NFS slower that a local disk? Likely so, right up until you have a disk failure, have to restore from tape instead of a snapshot, or fsck 500 Gigs. Is performance very good anyway? Yes. If a SAN can handle the average Microsoft product output, U2's text based data cannot be all that difficult. (hello world in msword is worth 5 groups in UV.) I apologize for the evangelical bent. There are doubtlessly architectural solutions other than NFS mounts, and some may be appropriate to your hardware and applications. NFS can be quite simple and surprisingly robust. -Rick -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Ty Haller Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 10:50 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? Thanks. I'm aware of the advantages. I was more concerned with the IO requirements and how that would impact shared storage. Ty Haller SEFCU Lead Administrator - System Services thal...@sefcu.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rick Nuckolls Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 11:13 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: Re: [U2] SAN? Ty, We have used a NetApps SAN for a number of years with Solaris for Universe data. (For Universe) there is the obvious tweak of allowing direct access to NFS, and depending on the type of SAN, there are probably some mount options to optimize the throughput. It also helps to have a fair amount of memory for file caching, but it works great and provides many important advantages. A couple of caveats: Do not allow access to snapshots through the same NFS mount as the primary data. For NetApps, at least, the snapshot has the same inode as the live data file, so the snapshot tree must be mounted as a separate device to avoid confusing (Universe) with conflicting file headers and data. NFS mounts work fine, as long as access to a particular directory tree is managed by a single data server. Oracle supports this same configuration, though I do not think that Rocket has much experience with it. Although difficult, it is possible to install Universe a SAN, and then run it on a VM, which means that you can snapshot almost all of the UV environment at once! Rick Nuckolls Lynden Inc -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Ty Haller Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 6:15 AM To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' Subject: [U2] SAN? Morning, I am curious if anybody has UniData Accounts running off a Shared Enterprise SAN? We currently have an Enterprise SAN for our VMware Environment and would like to put a handful of UniData Test Accounts on it. We are using UniData 7.2 on an IBM P6 running AIX 6.1, the SAN would be 4GB Fiber Attached. Thoughts? Ty Haller | Lead Administrator - System Services | SEFCU | thal...@sefcu.com 700 Patroon Creek Blvd. Albany, NY 12206 | Phone: 518-464-5210 | Fax: 518- 464-5209 This message may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole purpose of communication with the addressee. Dissemination or publication in any format is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify SEFCU immediately. Help save a tree. Please print this e-mail only if it is truly necessary. Thank you. ___ U2-Users mailing list
Re: [U2] Running total
Are you looking for @1? This gives a column containing running total (I
learned it from this list)
DICT AP F1invoice value (A type or I type)
T1 running total I type: F2: @1 + F1
So, listing 3 items gives:
LIST AP TOTAL F1 KATE 10:26:30am 03 Jul 2013 PAGE1
APID. INV. T1.
AMT.
101*850563 52,578.24 52,578.24
101*850568 -86.24 52,492.00
101*850569 86.24 52,578.24
*** 52,578.24
3 records listed.
On 2 July 2013 20:29, Martin Phillips martinphill...@ladybridge.com wrote:
Hi,
As far as I know, the only way to do this in U2 is to use either a common
variable or one of the @USERn variables in a subroutine to
accumulate the result. Handling multi-values is not hard (as below).
Getting this to work for breakpoint lines is a bit more
awkward.
For example, using UniVerse's demonstration sales database
(INITIALIZE.DEMO), I can create an I-type named ACCUM that reads
I
subr('ACCUMULATE', ITEM.TOTAL)
MD2
Cumulative
8R
M
BOUGHT
and a program catalogued as ACCUMULATE
function accumulate(item)
common /total/tot
if @ni = 1 then tot = 0
x = ''
n = dcount(item, @vm)
for i = 1 to n
tot += item1,i
x1,i = tot
next i
return (x)
end
I can then do
LIST ORDERS PROD.NO SELL QTY ITEM.TOTAL ACCUM
@ID.. Product No Sell. Qty. Item Total Cumulative
10002 605 $40.00 1 $40.00 40.00
501 $5.00 1 $5.00 45.00
502 $5.00 1 $5.00 50.00
504 $5.00 1 $5.00 55.00
10006 112 $6.00 3 $18.00 73.00
10004 704$115.00 1 $115.00 188.00
301 $10.00 9 $90.00 278.00
10005 502 $5.00 9 $45.00 323.00
10003 202 $5.0010 $50.00 373.00
204 $5.0010 $50.00 423.00
10001 112 $6.00 7 $42.00 465.00
418 $27.00 4 $108.00 573.00
704$115.00 1 $115.00 688.00
10007 301 $10.00 3 $30.00 718.00
Maybe Rocket can be persuaded to implement the CUMULATIVE field modifier
keyword that we have in QM to make this trivial
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 Wjhonson
Sent: 02 July 2013 01:36
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Running total
Teach me again how to do a running total in a Access/Recall/English report.
I haven't done one in years, but I seem to recall that it's possible.
___
U2-Users mailing list
mailto:U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
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
--
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
