Re: Data queue space -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

James,

At 7/31/00 10:36 PM -0700, you wrote:

So I could think of a data queue as a PF with reuse delete *yes, and if
it's a FIFO or LIFO queue is has a hidden timestamp index to keep things in order?

I would imagine that there's some type of mechanism like that. Maybe it's actually indexed by timestamp.

One last concern though, and with the current speed of machines it may be moot, but what is the performance curve on a data queue? I understand they get slower the bigger they get.

I don't have any benchmarks for that (Richard J. - do you have any?), but I would imagine that the old guidelines would be way off by now.

Just to change the subject a little, has anyone tried using message
queues instead of data queues? I've never used the product, but isn't
the MQ product line based upon data exchange through Message Queues?

There are different considerations using msgs, such as the need to remove them yourself once they have been processed, performance overhead (data queues are much faster), etc., but it's certainly a viable alternative.

-mark

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.