If I were trying to access an index of a global variable, what time complexity would this operation have? My understanding of languages like Java/C++ is that arrays are stored as blocks of memory so that x[15] would have a lookup time complexity of O(1) because it just goes to (address of the array + 15) and retrieves the value stored there.

How does this work in Cache where the index of a variable isn't necessarily an integer value? If I were to have a variable like the following:

x("Adam") = "Red"

x("George") = "Blue"

x("Bryan") = "Green"

etc...

Please excuse my ignorance. I am trying to identify what areas would be best to review in the System Dashboard (for Cache 2010.2) for performance issues with the database. It seems to be running slower than usual, but I am trying to find out the best way to go about identifying what the issue is.

The following are captures from the System Dashboard.

As always, thanks a lot for your help.

Currently, we have an application running in one namespace ("Database B") that has globals and routines mapped to another database ("Database A"). After enforcing clean up on Database A, we found that 90% of the disk is free. We would like to compact Database A and release the unused space. However, we are running OpenVMS, which seems to be the issue.

For databases consisting of only globals, we are able to use ^GBLOCKCOPY; however, we need to ensure that the routines and mappings are also copied.

Hello Community,

I recently encountered a issue with Caché and I can't figure out where the problem is coming from.

I noticed that the license limit (200) was reached whenever I was opening my Studio (so it seems). When this occurs, I restart Caché (with the Cube in the Taskbar), and the number of license used is back to 1%, but grows back after. The time taken before the number of license grows back again looks pretty random.

Here is a couple of screenshots :

After what is seemed was weeks, I finally got SSL/TLS enabled on both Apache Web Server and IRIS using the Web Gateway. However while we can now use HTTPS to connect to our Development instance of IRIS, I am running into several errors when I have others try to access the Management Portal via HTTPS.

We are seeing...

Hi,

If I test the Native api for Node.js from the documentation, I noticed (if I'm correct) all methods and calls are synchronous. By default due to the nature of Node.js, there is only one thread of execution and normally all JavaScript methods and all calls should be asynchronous and use either a callback function (the "old way") or promises or the async/await contruct to return their result, e.g.:

Hello,

I want to process more requests per second in Ensemble 2015 (soap service). My problem is in a business process that makes a great transformation. I thought that I can put its group size to 4 (the current value is 1), or put 4 business processes and apply, for example, the round-robin algorithm.
Which alternative is better?

Hi guys,

I'm working on a project with my client.
They have a visit table which has about 7,000,000 records. The table is used in a random search page witch holds 20+ conditions to be combined.
The table is defined as below:

As I was going though and trying to figure out why our CACHE.dat has increased in size over the past 18 days, I found that EnsLib_HL7.Message is still retaining messages dating back to 2014 even though we have our purge set to 10 days. Has anyone else experienced this?

Thanks

Scott Roth

The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center

Hi Guys,

Can you please advise on the below queries.

Query 1:

Example 1:

 S a="345",b="arun",c="kumar",d="hi",e="yello",f="orange"

Example 2:

S a="345"

S b="arun"

S c="kumar"

S d="hi"

S e="yello"

S f="orange"

Can you please advise me, which one is performance wise is better.

Query 2:

Example 1:

S:a=1 R="Arun"

Example 2:

I a=2 R="Arun"

Please advise me, which one is giving better performance in this.

I’ve a server that is running Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition SP2 x86.

I just noted that you cannot allocate shared memory beyond 1.6GB.

Is this a known problem between Cache and this OS architecture, and has anyone configured it beyond this?

Running cache 5.0.21 64 bit on Windows server 2016 in virtual environment. Trying to understand why every single process disk read speed (simple sql data walks) caps around ~20MB/s, however 2 paralell such tasks on different data areas can reach 19MB/s each, four - 17MB/s each, that is 70MB/s total, etc. Also simple copy file to nul on that system reach ~400MB/s.

What can keep single query on idle system from reaching for example 200MB/s? Virtualization? Windows? Cache? Processors are below 1-3%

Currently, we are running 2014.1 on two different servers (OpenVMS, RHEL). The plan is to transition from OpenVMS to RHEL, but our Write Daemon is in a Troubled state on both servers.

On the OpenVMS server, we have a WIJ file that's 26G and can grow to 40G (size of database cache). Since it hasn't grown to 40G, we don't believe the size of the WIJ file to be the issue.

What else should we be looking at regarding the performance of the Write Daemon?

Currently, we are receiving an alert that states, "Write Daemon still on pass 31". It's been that way for a few hours.

I was wondering if it is possible to identify what the WD has left to work on so that we can see how we can reduce this and possibly identify if there are issues with the way something is written.

Thanks in advance for any insight.