Hi!

(ccing Magma list)

"Bill Schwab" BSchwab@anest.ufl.edu wrote:

Hello all,

Any success or horror stories with OmniBase and/or Magma? Can you report that either worked well at or got into trouble beyond any particular size (either in object count or bytes of data)? Other comments?

Bill

From the Gjallar project we can report that Magma works really nice. We

have had perhaps 2-3 buglets and Chris fixed them all quickly and promptly. IIRC they were related mainly to the query stuff which Chris pushed out fast because of our popular demand - so he was definitely not to blame. :)

Generally I would say that the only "issue" we had was slow(ish) read performance. So if you write an "interactive" application with Magma you need to take two things into account:

1. Since Magma is an ODB it builds a cache of objects into your session. So when/if the session is cold you get punished with load times. But when it is hot they are zero. Essentially what this means in Gjallar is that when a user logs in things will take a bit of time the first time she does something. But from then on things go much faster and since a Gjallar user typically is logged in for a long time - typically all day - it works fine.

2. Even with a warm session (with lots of cached objects) you can still get punished with longish load times. This can be remedied a LOT with setting up good read strategies.

IMHO I think Magma would SHINE if we somehow could boost the serialization/deserialization mechanism in it. Because I suspect this is where the bottleneck is regarding the above. An Exuperified Magma could be the answer - or some other HARD approach - I dunno. Chris?

regards, Göran