I am designing the software architecture for an Ensemble/Healthshare production to be deployed on Amazon AWS EC2 servers (2 mirrored m4.large - 4 vCPUs / 16 GiB RAM running RedHat Linux 3.10.0-327.el7.x86_64 and Healthshare for RHEL 64-bit 2016.2.1). It's a rather CPU-intensive production involving massive XSLT 2.0 transformations (massive both in terms of size and volume). I was wondering if anyone has experience configuring Ensemble productions on EC2 servers. My question or concern has to do with the following statement in the Ensemble documentation:

Hi, Community!

Please find the Developer Community Video of the week on InterSystems Developers YouTube Channel:

System Sizing for Insanely Large Deployments

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Yjql-j8cGJo
[This is an embedded link, but you cannot view embedded content directly on the site because you have declined the cookies necessary to access it. To view embedded content, you would need to accept all cookies in your Cookies Settings]

Hyper-Converged Infrastructure (HCI) solutions have been gaining traction for the last few years with the number of deployments now increasing rapidly. IT decision makers are considering HCI when scoping new deployments or hardware refreshes especially for applications already virtualised on VMware. Reasons for choosing HCI include; dealing with a single vendor, validated interoperability between all hardware and software components, high performance especially IO, simple scalability by addition of hosts, simplified deployment and simplified management.

In this short article we talk about how to get Yape running in a docker container to avoid having to setup python on your machine.

It's been a while since the last article in this series, so let's recap quickly.

Globals, these magic swords for storing data, have been around for a while, but not many people can use them efficiently or know about this super-weapon altogether.

If you use globals for tasks where they truly shine, the results may be amazing, either in terms of increased performance or dramatic simplification of the overall solution (1, 2).

Globals offer a special way of storing and processing data, which is completely different from SQL tables. They were first introduced in 1966 in the M(UMPS) programming language, which was initially used in medical databases. It is still used in the same way, but has also been adopted by some other industries where reliability and high performance are top priorities: finance, trading, etc.

Later M(UMPS) evolved into Caché ObjectScript (COS). COS was developed by InterSystems as a superset of M. The original language is still accepted by developers' community and alive in a few implementations. There are several signs of activity around the web: MUMPS Google group, Mumps User's group), effective ISO Standard, etc.

Modern global based DBMS supports transactions, journaling, replication, partitioning. It means that they can be used for building modern, reliable and fast distributed systems.

Globals do not restrict you to the boundaries of the relational model. They give you the freedom of creating data structures optimized for particular tasks. For many applications reasonable use of globals can be a real silver bullet offering speeds that developers of conventional relational applications can only dream of.

Globals as a method of storing data can be used in many modern programming languages, both high- and low-level. Therefore, this article will focus specifically on globals and not the language they once came from.

Beginning - see Part 1.

3. Variants of structures when using globals

A structure, such as an ordered tree, has various special cases. Let's take a look at those that have practical value for working with globals.

3.1 Special case 1. One node without branches

Sometimes, it comes in very handy (especially for the EAV model) to use array properties in a class and be able to qickly search by their elements: both the key and the value.

Let’s take a look at a simple example:

Code coverage and performance optimization of code has come up a bunch of times already, so most of you should already be aware of the SYS.MONLBL utility.

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.

Any recommendations, to this VMware disk type debate, with Cache installations in particular?

Thick Provision Lazy Zeroed

Thick Provision Eager Zeroed

Thin Provision

In last week's discussion we created a simple graph based on the data input from one file. Now, as we all know, sometimes we have multiple different datafiles to parse and correlate. So this week we are going to load additional perfmon data and learn how to plot that into the same graph.
Since we might want to use our generated graphs in reports or on a webpage, we'll also look into ways to export the generated graphs.

Can someone direct me to where in the documentation we can find how consumption may be calculated for global storage?

EDIT: After receiving some responses, it seems I was unclear in my initial inquiry. I am looking to determine our rate of consumption of storage; however, I am having some difficulty in doing that.

Currently, namespace Alpha is configured to use database AlphaDB as its global database. How would we go about having namespace Alpha configured to use database AlphaDB for its global database except where global ^Customers(CustomerId) has a CustomerId greater than 10M, which we would like to have it redirected to database BetaDB.

In other words, ^|"AlphaDB"|Customers contains all customers between 1 and 10,000,000; and ^|"BetaDB"|Customers contains all customers greater than 10,000,000. Any help would be appreciated.

We don't often use SQL within our org, which is mostly due to the performance issue we experience due to the quantity of data we are reviewing.

Aside from the standard performance measures for non-Caché databases, are there any recommended approaches when querying large tables?

The table would have roughly 50M records, but there are not a finite amount of sub-nodes.