Baker, There is a happy medium between CPU overhead and bandwidth usage. If you use compression of some kind, then CPU overhead is going to be higher than an uncompressed stream. Cached disk writes are normally going to be faster than network writes, unless you have a fiber backbone or dedicated gigabit link. I can't give benchmarks for any of the integration I've done here, but I can say that:
1) XML is really wasteful all-around, but it can make your data considerably more portable. 2) SQL is a norm these days and some servers optimize on the query language and storage mechanism relating to it. MySQL is quite fast, in my limited experience. I can't afford to play with MS SQL Server. SQL implementations in MV may still leave a lot to be desired, though. 3) ASCII data from MV can be highly compressed, but once again there's the CPU usage. Raw/compressed ASCII is extremely portable, if the means and will are there to implement a custom communication protocol. (see my unfinished RFC for a stepping stone [http://mvdevcentral.com/MV-RFC.txt]) Some people may think I'm wierd, but I'm quite fond of SMTP services for large-block data transferring. It's not exactly real-time bi-directional, so I'm not sure if it fits your question. You decide. MTA servers like Postfix were written with efficiency in mind and have built-in routing logic and access control(mail boxes and aliases). A pop client can easily be written in most BASIC flavors, or a CLI client can be downloaded for free, which you can use to obtain new mail. MIME envelopes don't have to always contain text, photos, and HTML. They can contain a compressed image of an entire file's worth of MV data(within mail storage limitations) or the last 5 minute's transactional changes. Food for thought, even though I didn't exactly spell out a solution. ---------------------------------------- Glen Batchelor IT Director All-Spec Industries phone: (910) 332-0424 fax: (910) 763-5664 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.all-spec.com Blog: http://blog.all-spec.com ---------------------------------------- > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Baker Hughes > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 11:58 AM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: [U2] Fastest Bi-Directional data transfer btwn MV and non MV dbms > > Hey, > > What is the fastest and lowest cpu overhead method of transferring data > between U2/MV databases, and other data sources? > > Assumed: > a) no restrictions on underlying OS - whichever best facilitates your > proposed method. > b) no restrictions on Database of choice - I know this is a U2 list and > we all have commitments to it, but if someone else (QM, Cache, D3...) is > doing something that we ought to be doing in U2, name the db and feat > they are accomplishing. > C) Production system - the system must also support your OLTP users, not > dedicated to data serving > > The primary concern is throughput, screaming fast throughput. > > Dogs that won't hunt: > 1) if you want to take a potshot at methods that are in your estimation > - tired dogs - take aim. > 2) beneficent and ruthless honesty - so that this doesn't descend into a > religious war please be honest yet charitable. > 3) No Ads - don't respond with [just] a product name, tell what it does, > the underlying method / technology > > We are after the technically superior destination, emotions aside, > barring past development investments. > I'm trying to take a clean white board approach to this question and > appreciate your help in answering it. > > A few to consider [just as starters]: > i) old jacks - WRITE/READBLK from MV triggered by whatever signal/method > ii) Ajax - Async jscript & Xml > iii) ODBC / JDBC > > Thanks so much, > -Baker > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
