Cloud computing: scalable DB

Andre Garzia andre at
Wed May 19 14:36:50 EDT 2010


Thanks for the quick reply. I am commenting your comments mixed in the quote
below. I also have a shot to claim my "deadliest database schema" record

 > Thanks for dropping in the thread. One thing that I think is stopping
> some
> > rev developers moving to valentina is that there's no valentina server
> for
> > revServer. The FREE Valentina server has adaptors only for ruby and php,
> if
> > we had RevServer support or at least a public available protocol to talk
> to
> > valentina server then we could implement support in RevServer itself.
> As revServer you mean this?
> Why you talk about Valentina Free Server?
> Why cannot be used Valentina Office Server?

Yes, I mean revServer in the On-Rev service. Any of the options could be
cool may it be the Free or the Office server

> > I think that David is doing some web development since most of the uses
> of
> > SimpleDB and RDS are related to web apps. Right now, we can't do web
> > development with valentina and rev. Which is a pitty since valentina is
> > deadly fast and provides the key-value stuff.
> Why you can't?

Because revServer can't access externals, so the ADK for Rev does not work
with revServer. It needs a pure revTalk library that talks to Valentina
Server to work.

> Any OS platform. You install VSERVER, make your REV app.
> Host them together. What problems?
> Plus the same VSERVER can be touched by any other Valentina Client
>    from C++, C#, ObjC ... To PHP, RB, REV, Director, ShockWave, ...

As the above comment, with revServer we can't access any valentina for rev
routines since it does not support externals. We would need a pure revTalk

> > I too believe that no one here will reach the limit of a single server. I
> am
> > working right now on a system which has one database with 6 thousand
> tables
> > and millions and millions of records and it still a single mysql server.
> And
> > before you all curse me, I didn't design this stuff, I arrived at it
> after
> > THREE earlier programmers, I would never design anything with 6 thousand
> > tables...
> That is cool :)
> 2 weeks ago I have to hear about man with 1000 tables..
> You have new record :)
Now, check out this screen shot I just took:

This is ONE MASSIVE DATABASE with mind melting amount of information, tables
with 55 million records... ARGH! I *hate* it.

> > What most users want here is just some kind of persistance and minimal
> > querying. Many here don't even do joins or views or fancy SQL stuff.
> To keep e.g. Prefs?
> For this exists ini, xml files :)
> RDBMS is really not required here.

Exactly, but I was thinking more like documents or structured data not
unlike what one would put in an XML file but using Valentina would make
searching much easier than using xml...

-- All We Do Is Code.

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list