SEO
vBulletin Search Engine Optimization
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
04-20-2008, 03:20 PM
| ||||
| ||||
 Re: Out of Box Experience for Cheetah. Martin Fuerderer said: > OTC wrote on 17.03.2007 16:25:19: >> >> Tool said: >> > If the assumption is to install on Linux, then one could simply walk >> > through >> > the boot up messages, such as what dmesg puts out, parse CPU > information, >> > or >> > also parse /proc/cpuinfo or /proc/meminfo, etc. These information > sources >> > are >> > relatively easy to find on Linux, however, it doesn't address other >> > unix-type >> > platforms, or Windows. >> >> Yes, it would be fairly easy to do with Linux, probably also easy but >> different with (each different flavour of) Unix and possibly even easy > but >> different again with Windoze. >> >> That's why, as a first approximation, I'd suggest a handful of > half-decent >> options, it's easier than trying to suss every possible platform >> accurately. >> >> > Might want a combination of a recommended choice based on your system > or >> > choose from a list. >> > >> > -t- >> > >> > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> >> DL Redden said: >> >>> Wouldn't it be nice if the installer was smart enough to sniff out > the >> >>> machine info and suggest a reasonable list of configurations to > choose >> >>> from based on the machine size. That would be most useful for > getting >> >>> started right out of the box. >> >> >> >> Although it's possible to write something that probed a box's config, > it >> >> would be a lot of very platform-specific maintenance. Maybe we could >> >> write >> >> something on a GPL basis as a community with designated maintenance >> >> teams >> >> for each supported platform ... ? >> >> > > Looking at this (and similar issues) from a different angle ...: > > As a professional at work (in my profession that is) I want control. > And many options, parameters, etc. provide a lot of control (assuming > they work  . That is control for the professional who knows what he> is doing. Ideally the stuff works somehow automatically-magically with > some default settings, so it would work for those that "do not > (exactly) know what they are doing". But I would not expect that it > works optimally for my needs. And there's nothing more annoying than > some "system" (often software) that "thinks" it knows better than > myself what I want. Such behaviour really puts me off! Martin, I don't disagree with you. And I'm talking myself out of a job to a certain extent. But I'm constantly amazed at the number of sites I attend that still run with 200 buffers. I think it gives the install a lot better chance of success if someone at least runs with a half-decent config. At the end of the day, nothing is going to beat a properly tuned system, but a lot of people don't want to take the time to learn how to tune an instance for something that's just going to sit in the corner. > A database system like IDS is a very complex system. Why is there > the expectation that such systems should work optimally in all sorts > of disparate scenarios? > > Nobody expects that the average passenger can fly a Boing 767 in a > safe way. There's tangible hardware, and generally wide acceptance > that "touching earth the wrong way" is a disaster. > > But with highly complex software systems? People expect an > out-of-the-box installation on any chosen hardware in any chosen > infrastructure, and of course it should scale very well for 1 user > just developing something up to thousands of users running complex > queries. And, please, all this without having to configure anything. > > My guess is, such expectations prevail because there is no tangible > hardware. Nothing to really see ... so it must be easy. > But I'm sure there must be a more profound way to explain this > interesting phenomen that again and again astonishes me since many > years. > > Cheers, > Martin > -- > Martin Fuerderer > IBM Informix Development Munich, Germany > Information Management > > Sorry, but the following text is now required by German law: > IBM Deutschland GmbH > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Hans Ulrich Maerki > Geschäftsführung: Martin Jetter (Vorsitzender), Rudolf > Bauer, Christian Diedrich, Christoph Grandpierre, > Matthias Hartmann, Andreas Kerstan > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Stuttgart > Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 14562 > WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE 99369940 > >> > >> > -- >> > * >> > * http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVS3kdXycrM&mode=related&search> > * >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Informix-list mailing list >> > Informix-list@iiug.org >> > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list >> > >> > -- >> > This message has been scanned for viruses and >> > dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is >> > believed to be clean. >> > >> >> >> -- >> Bye now, >> Obnoxio >> >> "I'm astonished anyone pays real money for this crap." >> -- Cosmo >> >> -- >> This message has been scanned for viruses and >> dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is >> believed to be clean. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Informix-list mailing list >> Informix-list@iiug.org >> http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is > believed to be clean. > -- Bye now, Obnoxio "I'm astonished anyone pays real money for this crap." -- Cosmo -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.      |
|
04-20-2008, 03:21 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Out of Box Experience for Cheetah. "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message news:mailman.442.1174149655.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... >> I don't disagree with you. And I'm talking myself out of a job to a certain extent. But I'm constantly amazed at the number of sites I attend that still run with 200 buffers ... .... or 1 aio vp! > A database system like IDS is a very complex system. Why is there > the expectation that such systems should work optimally in all sorts > of disparate scenarios? > > Nobody expects that the average passenger can fly a Boing 767 in a > safe way. There's tangible hardware, and generally wide acceptance > that "touching earth the wrong way" is a disaster. Did you know that IBM has invented "autonomic" computing? It's been put into their DB2 range of databases. You never have to do anything to it: it tunes and fixes itself. |
|
04-20-2008, 03:21 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Out of Box Experience for Cheetah. Captain Pedantic said: > it > tunes and fixes itself. ....to standards that IBM reckon are acceptable. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "I'm astonished anyone pays real money for this crap." -- Cosmo -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean. |
Linear Mode
