Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [magicu-l] Re: Cache Database

Expand Messages
  • ירון קדמן-מג'יק
    Graham, Same here, I completely agree with you. Our company also has magic8.3 running on Cache and we are loving it. Maintenance is almost non existent,
    Message 1 of 21 , May 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Graham,
      Same here, I completely agree with you.
      Our company also has magic8.3 running on Cache and we are loving it.
      Maintenance is almost non existent, performance is very fast in batch. No
      problems in online.
      Dsql, joins and transactions (and other relational DB features) all work
      good.
      I also have to say that intersystem's support is excellent and they helped
      us a lot since we first started testing Cache until finally installing it to
      run in production.



      -----Original Message-----
      From: joshnuss [mailto:joshnuss@...]
      Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 6:20 AM
      To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [magicu-l] Re: Cache Database

      Hi Graham,

      Our company uses Cache with Magic 8.3. I can tell you from my
      experience, Cache is a phenomenal product - in every category.

      From a technical standpoint, the initial setup was a breeze; we
      converted our entire Magic table repository from btreive to Cache in
      an hour. And the performance is great too, in one instance we loaded
      750,000 records from an ascii text file into the database in under 5
      minutes. The product is also completely SQL compliant, so if you have
      any prior knowledge of SQL, you'll have no problem leveraging your
      existing skills.

      The people at Intersystems are equally amazing. Unlike other
      software vendors, they are eager to make your project work. They even
      have staff that is familiar with Magic!

      Enough said. The best way for you to evaluate Cache is see it in
      action. You can download a trial version at www.intersystems.com,

      Chaim Nussbaum
      Oracle DBA, MCSD
      chaimnus@...





      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Agustin Cruz
      Hi Graham: I have experience using Magic v8.3 with Microsoft SQL Server 7. Do you use ODBC to connect to Cache? Comparing with Microsoft SQL Server 7, do you
      Message 2 of 21 , May 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Graham:
        I have experience using Magic v8.3 with Microsoft SQL Server 7.
        Do you use ODBC to connect to Cache?

        Comparing with Microsoft SQL Server 7, do you think that Cache is better
        database option?

        Do you tested the Cache gateway that come with Magic v9?

        Thanks in advance,

        Agustin Cruz





        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "ירון קדמן-מג'יק" <yaronk@...>
        To: <magicu-l@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 4:31 AM
        Subject: RE: [magicu-l] Re: Cache Database


        > Graham,
        > Same here, I completely agree with you.
        > Our company also has magic8.3 running on Cache and we are loving it.
        > Maintenance is almost non existent, performance is very fast in batch. No
        > problems in online.
        > Dsql, joins and transactions (and other relational DB features) all work
        > good.
        > I also have to say that intersystem's support is excellent and they helped
        > us a lot since we first started testing Cache until finally installing it
        to
        > run in production.
        >
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: joshnuss [mailto:joshnuss@...]
        > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 6:20 AM
        > To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [magicu-l] Re: Cache Database
        >
        > Hi Graham,
        >
        > Our company uses Cache with Magic 8.3. I can tell you from my
        > experience, Cache is a phenomenal product - in every category.
        >
        > From a technical standpoint, the initial setup was a breeze; we
        > converted our entire Magic table repository from btreive to Cache in
        > an hour. And the performance is great too, in one instance we loaded
        > 750,000 records from an ascii text file into the database in under 5
        > minutes. The product is also completely SQL compliant, so if you have
        > any prior knowledge of SQL, you'll have no problem leveraging your
        > existing skills.
        >
        > The people at Intersystems are equally amazing. Unlike other
        > software vendors, they are eager to make your project work. They even
        > have staff that is familiar with Magic!
        >
        > Enough said. The best way for you to evaluate Cache is see it in
        > action. You can download a trial version at www.intersystems.com,
        >
        > Chaim Nussbaum
        > Oracle DBA, MCSD
        > chaimnus@...
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • Jim Stephenson
        Could you share some details about the conversion of your Magic table respository from btrieve to Cache?
        Message 3 of 21 , May 1, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Could you share some details about the conversion of your Magic table
          respository from btrieve to Cache?

          At 04:19 AM 5/1/2002 +0000, you wrote:
          >Hi Graham,
          >
          > Our company uses Cache with Magic 8.3. I can tell you from my
          >experience, Cache is a phenomenal product - in every category.
          >
          > From a technical standpoint, the initial setup was a breeze; we
          >converted our entire Magic table repository from btreive to Cache in
          >an hour. And the performance is great too, in one instance we loaded
          >750,000 records from an ascii text file into the database in under 5
          >minutes. The product is also completely SQL compliant, so if you have
          >any prior knowledge of SQL, you'll have no problem leveraging your
          >existing skills.
          >
          > The people at Intersystems are equally amazing. Unlike other
          >software vendors, they are eager to make your project work. They even
          >have staff that is familiar with Magic!
          >
          > Enough said. The best way for you to evaluate Cache is see it in
          >action. You can download a trial version at www.intersystems.com,
          >
          >Chaim Nussbaum
          >Oracle DBA, MCSD
          >chaimnus@...
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • Ian Whybrow
          YOu are the first in the group to actually admit to using it. I am interested in cost comparisons. For example what would it cost for a 5, 10 user Win NT
          Message 4 of 21 , May 1, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            YOu are the first in the group to actually admit to using it. I am
            interested in cost comparisons. For example what would it cost for a 5,
            10 user Win NT version , a single user Win 95-2000 and an unlimited
            Internet application. (this last one is where Pervasive is very cost
            competitive.)

            Ian Whybrow
            Logistics Technologies

            joshnuss wrote:

            >Hi Graham,
            >
            > Our company uses Cache with Magic 8.3. I can tell you from my
            >experience, Cache is a phenomenal product - in every category.
            >
            > From a technical standpoint, the initial setup was a breeze; we
            >converted our entire Magic table repository from btreive to Cache in
            >an hour. And the performance is great too, in one instance we loaded
            >750,000 records from an ascii text file into the database in under 5
            >minutes. The product is also completely SQL compliant, so if you have
            >any prior knowledge of SQL, you'll have no problem leveraging your
            >existing skills.
            >
            > The people at Intersystems are equally amazing. Unlike other
            >software vendors, they are eager to make your project work. They even
            >have staff that is familiar with Magic!
            >
            > Enough said. The best way for you to evaluate Cache is see it in
            >action. You can download a trial version at www.intersystems.com,
            >
            >Chaim Nussbaum
            >Oracle DBA, MCSD
            >chaimnus@...
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
          • Andy Jerison
            Would you consider deploying Cach? at customer sites where there are no computer-savvy people? Andy ... From: éøåï ÷ãîï-î â é÷ Sent: Wednesday, May
            Message 5 of 21 , May 1, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Would you consider deploying Cach? at customer sites where there are
              no computer-savvy people?

              Andy

              > -----Original Message-----
              From: ירון קדמן-מ
              ג'יק
              Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2> 002 4:31 AM
              To: 'magicu-l@yahoogroups.com'
              Subject: Cache Database



              Graham,
              > Same here, I completely agree with you.
              Our company also
              has magic8.3 runn> ing on Cache and we are loving it.
              Maintenance is almost
              non existent, performance is very> fast in batch. No
              problems in onlin> e.
              Dsql, joins and
              transa> ctions (and other relational DB
              features) all work
              good.
              I
              also have to say that intersystem's support is excell> > ent and they
              helped
              us a lot since we first started testing
              >> > Cache until finally installing it to
              run in production.
            • sebastian mani
              HI all, I would also like to try out cache.I have an exisiting application on Magic 8.3 & Oracle.How do i convert to Cache?Do we have a separate gateway for
              Message 6 of 21 , May 1, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                HI all,
                I would also like to try out cache.I have an exisiting application on Magic
                8.3 & Oracle.How do i convert to Cache?Do we have a separate gateway for it?
                TIA
                sebastian


                >From: Ian Whybrow <sales@...>
                >Reply-To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
                >To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
                >Subject: Re: [magicu-l] Re: Cache Database
                >Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 11:02:56 -0400
                >
                >YOu are the first in the group to actually admit to using it. I am
                >interested in cost comparisons. For example what would it cost for a 5,
                >10 user Win NT version , a single user Win 95-2000 and an unlimited
                >Internet application. (this last one is where Pervasive is very cost
                >competitive.)
                >
                >Ian Whybrow
                >Logistics Technologies
                >
                >joshnuss wrote:
                >
                > >Hi Graham,
                > >
                > > Our company uses Cache with Magic 8.3. I can tell you from my
                > >experience, Cache is a phenomenal product - in every category.
                > >
                > > From a technical standpoint, the initial setup was a breeze; we
                > >converted our entire Magic table repository from btreive to Cache in
                > >an hour. And the performance is great too, in one instance we loaded
                > >750,000 records from an ascii text file into the database in under 5
                > >minutes. The product is also completely SQL compliant, so if you have
                > >any prior knowledge of SQL, you'll have no problem leveraging your
                > >existing skills.
                > >
                > > The people at Intersystems are equally amazing. Unlike other
                > >software vendors, they are eager to make your project work. They even
                > >have staff that is familiar with Magic!
                > >
                > > Enough said. The best way for you to evaluate Cache is see it in
                > >action. You can download a trial version at www.intersystems.com,
                > >
                > >Chaim Nussbaum
                > >Oracle DBA, MCSD
                > >chaimnus@...
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                > >
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
                >




                _________________________________________________________________
                Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
                http://www.hotmail.com
              • Andy Jerison
                Interesting.... How hard was it to convert an application from Btrieve to Cache? Did you take training from Intersystems? Thanks, Andy
                Message 7 of 21 , May 1, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Interesting....

                  How hard was it to convert an application from Btrieve to Cache?

                  Did you take training from Intersystems?

                  Thanks,

                  Andy

                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: ירון קדמן-מג'יק
                  > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 12:59 PM
                  > To: 'magicu-l@yahoogroups.com'
                  > Subject: RE: [magicu-l] RE: Cache Database
                  >
                  >
                  > Andy,
                  > My opinion is that it is perfect for that environment.
                  > Besides setup during installation (and implementing a
                  > backup routine if you
                  > need) no one has to touch it.
                  > If there is a configuration change that has to be made,
                  > it's all done
                  > through GUI.
                  > I just saw there is a new version of cache (ver 5), you
                  > might want to have a
                  > look at it at http://www.edbms.com/cache/future/42/42devkit.html
                  > And for the magic applications in particular, look at the
                  > SQL engine of
                  > cache enhancements at
                  > http://www.edbms.com/cache/future/42/283_4.1docs/gcrn_sql.html
                  >
                  >
                • ירון קדמן-מג'יק
                  Andy, My opinion is that it is perfect for that environment. Besides setup during installation (and implementing a backup routine if you need) no one has to
                  Message 8 of 21 , May 1, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Andy,
                    My opinion is that it is perfect for that environment.
                    Besides setup during installation (and implementing a backup routine if you
                    need) no one has to touch it.
                    If there is a configuration change that has to be made, it's all done
                    through GUI.
                    I just saw there is a new version of cache (ver 5), you might want to have a
                    look at it at http://www.edbms.com/cache/future/42/42devkit.html
                    And for the magic applications in particular, look at the SQL engine of
                    cache enhancements at
                    http://www.edbms.com/cache/future/42/283_4.1docs/gcrn_sql.html


                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Andy Jerison [mailto:ajerison@...]
                    Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 5:53 PM
                    To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [magicu-l] RE: Cache Database

                    Would you consider deploying Cach? at customer sites where there are
                    no computer-savvy people?

                    Andy

                    > -----Original Message-----
                    From: ירון קדמן-מ
                    ג'יק
                    Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2> 002 4:31 AM
                    To: 'magicu-l@yahoogroups.com'
                    Subject: Cache Database



                    Graham,
                    > Same here, I completely agree with you.
                    Our company also
                    has magic8.3 runn> ing on Cache and we are loving it.
                    Maintenance is almost
                    non existent, performance is very> fast in batch. No
                    problems in onlin> e.
                    Dsql, joins and
                    transa> ctions (and other relational DB
                    features) all work
                    good.
                    I
                    also have to say that intersystem's support is excell> > ent and they
                    helped
                    us a lot since we first started testing
                    >> > Cache until finally installing it to
                    run in production.





                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  • ירון קדמן-מג'יק
                    Magic 8.3 uses the odbc gateway with Cache. ... From: sebastian mani [mailto:sebastiankm@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 6:02 PM To:
                    Message 9 of 21 , May 1, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Magic 8.3 uses the odbc gateway with Cache.

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: sebastian mani [mailto:sebastiankm@...]
                      Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 6:02 PM
                      To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [magicu-l] Re: Cache Database

                      HI all,
                      I would also like to try out cache.I have an exisiting application on Magic
                      8.3 & Oracle.How do i convert to Cache?Do we have a separate gateway for it?
                      TIA
                      sebastian


                      >From: Ian Whybrow <sales@...>
                      >Reply-To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
                      >To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
                      >Subject: Re: [magicu-l] Re: Cache Database
                      >Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 11:02:56 -0400
                      >
                      >YOu are the first in the group to actually admit to using it. I am
                      >interested in cost comparisons. For example what would it cost for a 5,
                      >10 user Win NT version , a single user Win 95-2000 and an unlimited
                      >Internet application. (this last one is where Pervasive is very cost
                      >competitive.)
                      >
                      >Ian Whybrow
                      >Logistics Technologies
                      >
                      >joshnuss wrote:
                      >
                      > >Hi Graham,
                      > >
                      > > Our company uses Cache with Magic 8.3. I can tell you from my
                      > >experience, Cache is a phenomenal product - in every category.
                      > >
                      > > From a technical standpoint, the initial setup was a breeze; we
                      > >converted our entire Magic table repository from btreive to Cache in
                      > >an hour. And the performance is great too, in one instance we loaded
                      > >750,000 records from an ascii text file into the database in under 5
                      > >minutes. The product is also completely SQL compliant, so if you have
                      > >any prior knowledge of SQL, you'll have no problem leveraging your
                      > >existing skills.
                      > >
                      > > The people at Intersystems are equally amazing. Unlike other
                      > >software vendors, they are eager to make your project work. They even
                      > >have staff that is familiar with Magic!
                      > >
                      > > Enough said. The best way for you to evaluate Cache is see it in
                      > >action. You can download a trial version at www.intersystems.com,
                      > >
                      > >Chaim Nussbaum
                      > >Oracle DBA, MCSD
                      > >chaimnus@...
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >




                      _________________________________________________________________
                      Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
                      http://www.hotmail.com




                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    • sworthington@attbi.com
                      How do you handle the lack of row level locking ? Isn t this a big deal for On-line when converting from Btrieve ?
                      Message 10 of 21 , May 1, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        How do you handle the lack of row level locking ?

                        Isn't this a big deal for On-line when converting from
                        Btrieve ?
                        > Hi Graham,
                        >
                        > Our company uses Cache with Magic 8.3. I can tell you from my
                        > experience, Cache is a phenomenal product - in every category.
                        >
                        > From a technical standpoint, the initial setup was a breeze; we
                        > converted our entire Magic table repository from btreive to Cache in
                        > an hour. And the performance is great too, in one instance we loaded
                        > 750,000 records from an ascii text file into the database in under 5
                        > minutes. The product is also completely SQL compliant, so if you have
                        > any prior knowledge of SQL, you'll have no problem leveraging your
                        > existing skills.
                        >
                        > The people at Intersystems are equally amazing. Unlike other
                        > software vendors, they are eager to make your project work. They even
                        > have staff that is familiar with Magic!
                        >
                        > Enough said. The best way for you to evaluate Cache is see it in
                        > action. You can download a trial version at www.intersystems.com,
                        >
                        > Chaim Nussbaum
                        > Oracle DBA, MCSD
                        > chaimnus@...
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        >
                        >
                      • shetty_vin
                        Hi to Steven Blank and all btrieve/pervasive gurus 1.I have a process which used to take around 7 secs to complete on win9x client, magic 8.3 sp11 and btrieve
                        Message 11 of 21 , May 8, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Hi to Steven Blank and all btrieve/pervasive gurus

                          1.I have a process which used to take around 7 secs to complete on
                          win9x client, magic 8.3 sp11 and btrieve 6.15 workstaion engine. The
                          process involves opening lots of files and tasks. Data is local and
                          ctrl file is also local.

                          2. Now i have shifted the all data and ctrl on to a winnt 4.0 server.
                          The network speed is 100 mbps. After shifting the data & ctrl file
                          onto server i tried to run the same process from the very win9x
                          client as decribed above in step 1. I have copied all the requester
                          files onto the client machine.

                          The setting at win9x client are requester ='yes', local ='yes'

                          Now it took 35-37 secs to run the very same process that is nearly 5
                          1/2 times more to complete the process.

                          I have also tried to run the same process using Pervasive SQL 2000
                          loaded on a diffrent server. The same result here too.

                          I am unbale to find out why there is a 5 times decrease in speed even
                          after using btrieve/pervasive server engines over the network. I have
                          also tried making my magic tasks resident and also preopen the files
                          where and when required.

                          I am somehow unable to comvince myself about this , coz i belv i
                          might be goofing up some where maybe with btrieve/pervasive setting.

                          Please advice at the earliest.

                          Warm Regards
                          Vineeth Shetty
                        • Micha Weiss
                          Hi One possible is that the machine is trying to reach the remote file with a local engine Although your settings (The setting at win9x client are requester
                          Message 12 of 21 , May 9, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi

                            One possible is that the machine is trying to reach the remote file with a
                            local engine

                            Although your settings (The setting at win9x client are requester ='yes',
                            local ='yes')

                            That's absolutely would speed down your accesses to the files.

                            You must access the server with machine that has no "left over" of any kind

                            of local btrieve engine - it is possible that there are some

                            Btrieve engine dll's at the magic runtime locating.

                            You can use the btrieve monitor to watch out if files do or do not open At
                            the server

                            Which protocol do u use ? Tcpip gain performance a lot.

                            Micha

                            HUJI


                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: shetty_vin [mailto:win_it@...]
                            Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 9:23 AM
                            To: magicu-l@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: [magicu-l] Btrieve/Pervasive Speed Issues


                            Hi to Steven Blank and all btrieve/pervasive gurus

                            1.I have a process which used to take around 7 secs to complete on
                            win9x client, magic 8.3 sp11 and btrieve 6.15 workstaion engine. The
                            process involves opening lots of files and tasks. Data is local and
                            ctrl file is also local.

                            2. Now i have shifted the all data and ctrl on to a winnt 4.0 server. The
                            network speed is 100 mbps. After shifting the data & ctrl file
                            onto server i tried to run the same process from the very win9x
                            client as decribed above in step 1. I have copied all the requester
                            files onto the client machine.

                            The setting at win9x client are requester ='yes', local ='yes'

                            Now it took 35-37 secs to run the very same process that is nearly 5
                            1/2 times more to complete the process.

                            I have also tried to run the same process using Pervasive SQL 2000
                            loaded on a diffrent server. The same result here too.

                            I am unbale to find out why there is a 5 times decrease in speed even
                            after using btrieve/pervasive server engines over the network. I have
                            also tried making my magic tasks resident and also preopen the files
                            where and when required.

                            I am somehow unable to comvince myself about this , coz i belv i
                            might be goofing up some where maybe with btrieve/pervasive setting.

                            Please advice at the earliest.

                            Warm Regards
                            Vineeth Shetty





                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          • Steven G. Blank
                            Vineeth, Well, it might be that the Magic application is not really using the server engine, that it s still using the workstation engine to access files
                            Message 13 of 21 , May 9, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Vineeth,

                              Well, it might be that the Magic application is not really using the server
                              engine, that it's still using the workstation engine to access files stored
                              on the server.

                              Or, it might be that TCP/IP is not configured correctly and the workstation
                              is having a hard time resolving the server's name into it's IP address.

                              Or, it might be that there's a network layer problem and packet latency is
                              through the roof.

                              Or, it might be that the server(s) is(are) overworked or strapped with a
                              slow hard drive or struggling with too little RAM.

                              Or ...

                              Steve Blank


                              At 12:22 AM 5/9/2002, you wrote:
                              >Hi to Steven Blank and all btrieve/pervasive gurus
                              >
                              >1.I have a process which used to take around 7 secs to complete on
                              >win9x client, magic 8.3 sp11 and btrieve 6.15 workstaion engine. The
                              >process involves opening lots of files and tasks. Data is local and
                              >ctrl file is also local.
                              >
                              >2. Now i have shifted the all data and ctrl on to a winnt 4.0 server.
                              >The network speed is 100 mbps. After shifting the data & ctrl file
                              >onto server i tried to run the same process from the very win9x
                              >client as decribed above in step 1. I have copied all the requester
                              >files onto the client machine.
                              >
                              >The setting at win9x client are requester ='yes', local ='yes'
                              >
                              >Now it took 35-37 secs to run the very same process that is nearly 5
                              >1/2 times more to complete the process.
                              >
                              >I have also tried to run the same process using Pervasive SQL 2000
                              >loaded on a diffrent server. The same result here too.
                              >
                              >I am unbale to find out why there is a 5 times decrease in speed even
                              >after using btrieve/pervasive server engines over the network. I have
                              >also tried making my magic tasks resident and also preopen the files
                              >where and when required.
                              >
                              >I am somehow unable to comvince myself about this , coz i belv i
                              >might be goofing up some where maybe with btrieve/pervasive setting.
                              >
                              >Please advice at the earliest.
                              >
                              >Warm Regards
                              >Vineeth Shetty

                              ----------------------------
                              Steven G. Blank
                              Salt Lake City, Utah USA
                              ----------------------------
                            • shetty_vin
                              Hi Steve First of all thanks for replying back. In fact i had forgot to write in other issues. 1. My Magic App and data is making use of the Pervasive Server
                              Message 14 of 21 , May 9, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hi Steve

                                First of all thanks for replying back. In fact i had forgot to write
                                in other issues.

                                1. My Magic App and data is making use of the Pervasive Server
                                Engine 2000 sp3 on WinNT Box. I have confirmed it by opening up the
                                pervasive monitor on the NT Box. I can see the app and data files in
                                the monitor.

                                2. My NT Box has 128 mb Ram and has disk cache set to 200 mb.

                                3. I have set
                                a.Extended Operation Buffer Size to 32000 under the Memory usage
                                section,
                                b.Cache allocation Size to 131072 under performance tuning of the
                                server engine.

                                4. However the size Magic Ctrl is 63 Mb, Around 35-37 files are
                                opened concurently during this specifc process, the avg. size of
                                each pervasive data file is 4-5 mb. This process is run only on from
                                a single node.

                                5. My Win9x workstation also has pervasive workstation engine sp 3
                                loaded and has 64mb ram.

                                6. Only Using TCP/IP as the sole network protocol and also for
                                pervasive.

                                7. I have also openend up the Windows NT Network Monitor tool to
                                check if any packet drops are there on the nertwork. There is no
                                packet drops on the network.

                                8. Network Speed is 10 mbs.

                                With this configuration my process time has come down from over 15
                                minutes as said earlier to 7-8 minutes.

                                Now are there any other setting which i might have to tinker to gain
                                more speed. How does Operation Bundle Limit, Intiation Time Limit and
                                System cache affect the speed of the system. Any other setting maybe?

                                Please Advice

                                Warm Regards
                                Vineeth Shetty

                                --- In magicu-l@y..., "Steven G. Blank" <sgblank@x> wrote:
                                > Vineeth,
                                >
                                > Well, it might be that the Magic application is not really using
                                the server
                                > engine, that it's still using the workstation engine to access
                                files stored
                                > on the server.
                                >
                                > Or, it might be that TCP/IP is not configured correctly and the
                                workstation
                                > is having a hard time resolving the server's name into it's IP
                                address.
                                >
                                > Or, it might be that there's a network layer problem and packet
                                latency is
                                > through the roof.
                                >
                                > Or, it might be that the server(s) is(are) overworked or strapped
                                with a
                                > slow hard drive or struggling with too little RAM.
                                >
                                > Or ...
                                >
                                > Steve Blank
                                >
                                >
                                > At 12:22 AM 5/9/2002, you wrote:
                                > >Hi to Steven Blank and all btrieve/pervasive gurus
                                > >
                                > >1.I have a process which used to take around 7 secs to complete on
                                > >win9x client, magic 8.3 sp11 and btrieve 6.15 workstaion engine.
                                The
                                > >process involves opening lots of files and tasks. Data is local and
                                > >ctrl file is also local.
                                > >
                                > >2. Now i have shifted the all data and ctrl on to a winnt 4.0
                                server.
                                > >The network speed is 100 mbps. After shifting the data & ctrl file
                                > >onto server i tried to run the same process from the very win9x
                                > >client as decribed above in step 1. I have copied all the requester
                                > >files onto the client machine.
                                > >
                                > >The setting at win9x client are requester ='yes', local ='yes'
                                > >
                                > >Now it took 35-37 secs to run the very same process that is nearly
                                5
                                > >1/2 times more to complete the process.
                                > >
                                > >I have also tried to run the same process using Pervasive SQL 2000
                                > >loaded on a diffrent server. The same result here too.
                                > >
                                > >I am unbale to find out why there is a 5 times decrease in speed
                                even
                                > >after using btrieve/pervasive server engines over the network. I
                                have
                                > >also tried making my magic tasks resident and also preopen the
                                files
                                > >where and when required.
                                > >
                                > >I am somehow unable to comvince myself about this , coz i belv i
                                > >might be goofing up some where maybe with btrieve/pervasive
                                setting.
                                > >
                                > >Please advice at the earliest.
                                > >
                                > >Warm Regards
                                > >Vineeth Shetty
                                >
                                > ----------------------------
                                > Steven G. Blank
                                > Salt Lake City, Utah USA
                                > ----------------------------
                              • Steven G. Blank
                                Vineeth, A couple of statistics leap out at me: ... Your server needs more RAM, at least 256MB -- 512MB would be even better. ... Did you copy this number down
                                Message 15 of 21 , May 10, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Vineeth,

                                  A couple of statistics leap out at me:

                                  At 11:54 PM 5/9/2002, you wrote:
                                  ><snip>
                                  >2. My NT Box has 128 mb Ram and has disk cache set to 200 mb.


                                  Your server needs more RAM, at least 256MB -- 512MB would be even better.

                                  ...and:
                                  >3. I have set
                                  ><snip>
                                  > b.Cache allocation Size to 131072 under performance tuning of the
                                  >server engine.


                                  Did you copy this number down correctly? A cache of 128 KILO-bytes is virtually NO cache. This alone could account for the poor performance.

                                  On a server having 128 MEGA-bytes of RAM, you could safely bump this up to at least 16,777,216 (16MB). If you do add some RAM to the server, set cache allocation at 20% of the total RAM.

                                  With regard to Initiation Time Limit (ITL) and Operation Bundle Limit (OBL), there are competing schools of thought:

                                  Statistically speaking, you'll get your best performance with a really large cache (no more than the total size of database, of course) and setting ITL and OBL to their maximum values. However, in practice, sooner or later that cache has to be flushed to disk and, depending on the speed of the disk subsystem and the number of dirty buffers, this can take from many seconds to many minutes to complete. During this operation, users see their applications appear to hang. When a user hits a down arrow on a table and doesn't get a response after just a few seconds, he/she starts getting antsy and is strongly inclined to three-finger the thing (Ctrl+Alt+Delete).

                                  So, in practice, I believe it's best to make one of two compromises: either set ITL at its maximum value and set OBL at something like 1000 (operations), or set OBL at its maximum value and set ITL at something like 10000 (milliseconds).

                                  The argument behind the first combination is to always write a known number of operations and not so many that it takes a long time to complete, regardless of how long it takes to accumulate that number of operations. The downside is that, in a lower-usage environment, it might take several hours to accumulate that many ops, during which time the data held in cache is at risk. As a result, this combination is likely better suited for a higher-usage environment.

                                  The argument behind the second combination is to always write data to disk after a known length of time, regardless of how many or few operations have accumulated. The downside is that, in a higher-usage environment, the cache may be being flushed to disk unnecessarily often, with a resulting hit on performance, or not often enough, with data held in cache at risk. As a result, this combination is likely better suited for a lower-usage environment.

                                  For a better understanding of these and other configuration settings, I suggest you participate in the Configuration and Tuning webinar that Pervasive offers monthly for free:

                                  http://www.pervasive.com/training/calendar/index.asp

                                  The next one is on 28-May-2002.

                                  ----------------------------
                                  Steven G. Blank
                                  Salt Lake City, Utah USA
                                  ----------------------------
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.