Re: [stellation-res] Windows Port

["Mark C. Chu-Carroll" <mcc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jonathan Gossage wrote:

>  
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: stellation-res-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:stellation-res-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Mark C.
> > Chu-Carroll
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 8:09 PM
> > To: stellation-res@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [stellation-res] Windows Port
> >
> >
> > Jonathan Gossage wrote:
> >
> >    
> >
> > > I have now got Stellation working under Windows XP. The testing
> > >      
> > environment
> >    
> >
> > > included the Sun JVM version 1.4.1_02 and the database was
> > >      
> > Firebird 1.5 Beta
> >    
> >
> > > 3 with the Jaybird JDBC driver 1.00 RC3. All tests were run on a dual
> > > processor 1,6Ghz machine with Athlon P2000 processors and 2GB of memory.
> > >
> > > I have both local and server based operation working. It is
> > >      
> > interesting that
> >    
> >
> > > running a server environment rather than a local environment where both
> > > client and server are on the same physical machine is nearly 3
> > >      
> > times as fast
> >    
> >
> > > with my test configuration.
> > >
> > > I found that running the ant script in a server based environment took 5
> > > min. 45 sec. whereas running it in a local configuration took 14
> > >      
> > min. During
> >    
> >
> > > the remote tests CPU usage on both processors was approximately 50%. Go
> > > figure :-)
> > >
> > > The next step is probably to address documentation. Our current
> > > documentation is completely Linux centric and I think it would
> > >      
> > be difficult
> >    
> >
> > > to combine the two environments in a readable interleaved form.
> > >      
> > Accordingly
> >    
> >
> > > I recommend that I produce separate Windows oriented documents.
> > >      
> > If you all
> >    
> >
> > > agree with this approach, I will try to factor out common stuff
> > >      
> > that is not
> >    
> >
> > > platform specific into includable units that can appear in both
> > >      
> > documents.
> >    
> >
> > >      
> > Congratulations on getting it working! That's wonderful news. Can
> > you please
> > post the patches for the change?
> >
> > I'm a little concerned about the overlapping documentation, but I think
> > my concern
> > is easily addressable.
> >
> > The root of my concern is this: any manual approach to sharing common
> > documentation
> > segments is almost inevitably doomed to failure. The solution, of
> > course, is to automate it.
> > I can write a simple processor to do includes, as long as we agree on a
> > syntax. I'd
> > propose the following, using the XML processing instruction format
> > (which is exactly what PIs are intended for.)
> >
> > <?include file="filename"?>
> >
> > If there is general approval, I'll toss together a simple processor
> > written in Java that expands this.
> >
> >    -Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >    
> >
> > > Thoughts
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> > >      
>
> Since I have absolutely no experience with Web programming of any kind I
> will have to let you take the lead on this. All I want is to minimize the
> documentation maintenance effort as much as possible.
>
> I have created Bugzilla entry 35267 for the work I have done. Enjoy and tell
> be what I will have to do to make use of the include stuff you are
> proposing.

Thanks. I'm about to leave for a conference. I'll be away until friday. 
I'll try to download the
patch before I go, but I probably won't have time to finish checking 
through it until
friday.

   -Mark

--
Mark Craig Chu-Carroll,  IBM T.J. Watson Research Center  
*** The Stellation project: Advanced SCM for Collaboration
***		http://www.eclipse.org/stellation
*** Work: mcc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/Home: markcc@xxxxxxxxxxx