Excellent post Ray... A couple of notes/corrections: a) The DW pieces you mention (Quality Manager, PRISM) were NOT acquired via the UniData acquisition. Rather, Ardent acquired Prism shortly after VMark acquired UniData and became Ardent. UniData basically came with the UniData product and the O2 database, which UniData had recently purchased. It was one of the leaders in the world of Object-Oriented Databases. It's main point of interest is that it's one of the few pieces of the UniData acquisition that still remain... Not the database, but many of the engineers stayed with Ascential to work on a short-lived product called Axielle, which was largely a portal product. They are now the key people working on our Web Services and Service Oriented Architecture products.
b) Regarding /.dshome - actually, we've removed this requirement all together in the latest releases. It's all geared at the environment variables DSHOME. Full support for rootless installs requires this. Additionally, this allows for true multi-install support of the engine. So, you can now install multiple copies/versions of the DSEngine on a given machine. An additional but related change was to allow for Dynamic Shared Attach points. Given that the UV world is heavily based on shared memory for things like concurrency, etc... this was important. In UV, the attach points and keys are fixed values, determined during porting time. This causes two potential issues. First, with conflicts in keys/attach points when hooking in to other products. Second is potential memory resource limitations. This is because the attach point decided also determines the upper bound of addressable memory in UV. In many cases this significantly limits the amount of memory. For most UV applications, this is largely a non-factor, but with DataStage it's a big deal. Now, in DS, those values are configurable. All of these changes are geared at the different customer that DS faces versus UV applications. These enterprise customers have different needs, and these changes were targetted at addressing those issues. c) Removals - actually, most of the changes involving component removal weren't performance related, but rather, maintenance related. Meaning, many changes that were going to be required within the product would require also changing these exterior components that weren't deemed strategic, so they were removed largely to avoid the overhead of having to update them as well. d) As you elude to, it is still interesting to note that any customer who was familiar with UV up until UV 9.6 would find the DS Engine environment perfectly normal. Except for some things that were removed or disabled (Spooler, UV/Net, Replication), the general environment is exactly the same. Some things were added to DS after that, and some things were added to UV after that, but otherwise they are the same. e) As to the IBM/Ascential collaboration - there is none. There was a good bit during the UV 10.0 creation, since the IBM folks were inexperienced with UV and asked for some consultation with certain aspects of things, but now they are doing things purely on their own (as should be the case). So, I don't expect any collaboration on either side going forward. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Ray Wurlod To: U2 Users Discussion List Sent: 2/1/2004 4:29 AM Subject: Re: [ot] Peoplesoft migrates to Ascential It is to be hoped that the DataStage engineers (some of whom are ex UniVerse) and the IBM U2 engineers continue to exchange ideas. Ultimately, however, it is not engineers who decide product directions. Recall the Golgafrinchan "B" Ark. _______________________________________________ u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
