Re: Here we go again...
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2006
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 66694
interpreted = N
texte = This is why I love reading this list. Normally other developer list or = forum is pretty "boring". Add to the fact that SM didn't response, it = forces developers to chat among ourselves. -----Original Message----- From: WebDNA Talk [mailto:WebDNA-Talk@talk.smithmicro.com]On Behalf Of Adam O'Connor Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 8:17 PM To: WebDNA Talk Subject: Re: Here we go again... Well said. I love webdna too, and am grateful for how it taught me=20 practical approaches to logic and understanding of programming. I would=20 like to always use webdna, but when not working for a 'webdna company' I = am forced to use other technologies, usually php or C#.=20 Webdna reminds me of beta cassette tapes, yeah they were better than=20 VHS, but if not used by the masses many people less subsequent=20 development is devoted to it, thus it eventually gets replaced by=20 something else - survival of the fittest. On a side note I sure miss those days, late nineties, when Ken would go=20 back and forth (usually a monologue) with SM, hehe, those days were=20 pretty entertaining. -Adam O Kenneth Grome wrote: >> Performance really comes down to how things >> are structured. Code for scale and I don't see=20 >> any limitations with webdna. >> =20 > > This assumes that it's practical or possible to "code for scale" in = webdna all the time. But this is not always possible ... > > In the example I just gave a day or so ago it was practically = impossible to "code for scale". Maybe you have not personally = experienced this type of situation and that's why you don't see any = limitations in webdna, but I have seen this situation -- more than once = -- and it's not a fun situation to be in when you love webdna and want = to use it for everything. > > In my recent example the data came from another source -- a source = that uses FMPro as its original database. This is not some little = company either, it is the leader in its industry. > > To make this data work in webdna means exporting it as tab-delimited = text files, then using those resulting flat files -- and whatever coding = techniques are available in webdna -- to get the search results required = by the client. The problem is that the data is not structured for = efficient use of webdna (by any stretch of the imagination) so webdna is = pathetically slow when doing the kind of searches the client requires.=20 > > As the web developer on this project, I did not have authorization to = go in and reformat these multi-megabyte data files in order to "make = them work" with webdna. This would have taken 10-20 times as long as = trying another software. Besides, I was not convinced that webdna would = perform as well as MySQL even if we did go in and reformat the databases = to optimize them for webdna -- because I've seen slow performance in = similar situations before when using webdna on such large data sets = (without nested searches) -- and I didn't want the client to have to pay = for all that labor only to find that webdna still couldn't handle the = task. > > So instead of "coding or scale" which would have meant restructuring = the database files that we exported from FMPro, I had my put everything = we had into PHP/MySQL. It took him less than 10 hours to do this (at = $1.20 an hour for his labor) ... so for about twelve bucks I was able to = see that PHP/MySQL was far superior to webdna in this situation. This = saved the client hundreds if not thousands of dollars over using a = webdna solution. > > The bottom line here is that webdna has serious limitations that make = it a poor substitute for MySQL in certain situations. In these = situations MySQL and other truly relational data systems are far better = suited to the tasks at hand. > > Sincerely,=20 > Kenneth Grome=20 > > owner@kengrome.com > kengrome@gmail.com > www.kengrome.com > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list
. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to = > Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ > =20 ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to = Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
This is why I love reading this list. Normally other developer list or = forum is pretty "boring". Add to the fact that SM didn't response, it = forces developers to chat among ourselves. -----Original Message----- From: WebDNA Talk [mailto:WebDNA-Talk@talk.smithmicro.com]On Behalf Of Adam O'Connor Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 8:17 PM To: WebDNA Talk Subject: Re: Here we go again... Well said. I love webdna too, and am grateful for how it taught me=20 practical approaches to logic and understanding of programming. I would=20 like to always use webdna, but when not working for a 'webdna company' I = am forced to use other technologies, usually php or C#.=20 Webdna reminds me of beta cassette tapes, yeah they were better than=20 VHS, but if not used by the masses many people less subsequent=20 development is devoted to it, thus it eventually gets replaced by=20 something else - survival of the fittest. On a side note I sure miss those days, late nineties, when Ken would go=20 back and forth (usually a monologue) with SM, hehe, those days were=20 pretty entertaining. -Adam O Kenneth Grome wrote: >> Performance really comes down to how things >> are structured. Code for scale and I don't see=20 >> any limitations with webdna. >> =20 > > This assumes that it's practical or possible to "code for scale" in = webdna all the time. But this is not always possible ... > > In the example I just gave a day or so ago it was practically = impossible to "code for scale". Maybe you have not personally = experienced this type of situation and that's why you don't see any = limitations in webdna, but I have seen this situation -- more than once = -- and it's not a fun situation to be in when you love webdna and want = to use it for everything. > > In my recent example the data came from another source -- a source = that uses FMPro as its original database. This is not some little = company either, it is the leader in its industry. > > To make this data work in webdna means exporting it as tab-delimited = text files, then using those resulting flat files -- and whatever coding = techniques are available in webdna -- to get the search results required = by the client. The problem is that the data is not structured for = efficient use of webdna (by any stretch of the imagination) so webdna is = pathetically slow when doing the kind of searches the client requires.=20 > > As the web developer on this project, I did not have authorization to = go in and reformat these multi-megabyte data files in order to "make = them work" with webdna. This would have taken 10-20 times as long as = trying another software. Besides, I was not convinced that webdna would = perform as well as MySQL even if we did go in and reformat the databases = to optimize them for webdna -- because I've seen slow performance in = similar situations before when using webdna on such large data sets = (without nested searches) -- and I didn't want the client to have to pay = for all that labor only to find that webdna still couldn't handle the = task. > > So instead of "coding or scale" which would have meant restructuring = the database files that we exported from FMPro, I had my put everything = we had into PHP/MySQL. It took him less than 10 hours to do this (at = $1.20 an hour for his labor) ... so for about twelve bucks I was able to = see that PHP/MySQL was far superior to webdna in this situation. This = saved the client hundreds if not thousands of dollars over using a = webdna solution. > > The bottom line here is that webdna has serious limitations that make = it a poor substitute for MySQL in certain situations. In these = situations MySQL and other truly relational data systems are far better = suited to the tasks at hand. > > Sincerely,=20 > Kenneth Grome=20 > > owner@kengrome.com > kengrome@gmail.com > www.kengrome.com > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to = > Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ > =20 ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to = Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
"Bess Ho"
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
[ModDate] & [ModTime] ? (1997)
Internal Include Call/Request (2003)
RE: PIXO support (1997)
WebCat2b12--[searchstring] bug (1997)
authorize net (2001)
Group search doesn't work. (1997)
Number of Line Items (1998)
A multi-processor savvy WebCatalog? (1997)
Help SM: Duplicate cart #'s - still! (2003)
PCS Frames (1997)
Calculating multiple shipping... (1997)
WebCat2b12plugin - [search] is broken ... not! (1997)
Newbie questions (1999)
Bug? (1997)
[protect admin] (1997)
unable to launch acgi in WebCat (1997)
getchars broken? (1997)
date and time stamp (2003)
[WebDNA] [WSC] WebDNA Development Summit (2014)
Checkbox question (1997)