Re: Massively distributed data

From: x <x-false_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 13:40:12 +0300
Message-ID: <40a34fc3@post.usenet.com>

Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****

"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message news:c7tku6$26q$1_at_news.netins.net...
> "x" <x-false_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:40a236f2$1_at_post.usenet.com...
> > **** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****
> >
> >
> > "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message
> > news:c7tacc$sgp$1_at_news.netins.net...
> > > "x" <x-false_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:40a20063$1_at_post.usenet.com...
> > > > **** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:c7s5um$7nk$1_at_news.netins.net...
> > > > > I think this is a fascinating question and maybe some of you will
> > agree
> > > > and
> > > > > will have suggestions. I sat next to Jim Waldo from Sun at a
lunch

> at

> > a
> > > > > Jini Community Conference in Boston earlier this year. He was

> talking

> > > > about
> > > > > medical information coming directly from people in some way. The

> idea

> > > > would
> > > > > be to have information about the health of an individual come from
> > their
> > > > > body. This was still in the stage of formulating the problem
> > statement,
> > > > so
> > > > > the rest is just related to my own reflections on the problem.
> > > >
> > > > > Possible simple scenario:
> > > >
> > > > I hope this would not be possible :-)
> > >
> > > OK, let's figure that somehow there is data from individuals with some
> > > ability to push itself and/or be accessed. Remove the need to
consider
> > the
> > > options for how this data flows from the person.
> >
> > But this is a very important issue and cannot be easily removed.
> >
> > > Yes, you are right that at any point of interest, you would want to
> > > take/have a snapshot of all of the data attributes.
> >
> > If the data is "massively distributed" how could this be done ?

>
> I'm just talking about getting all data related to a single person at a
> single point in time (or getitng the value at the closest time available).
> One flawed, but possibly useful, approach would be that if a particular
> value goes from green to yellow, then all other info is requested asap.

> addition, if there were some history of n seconds worth of data (perhaps
> residing at each collection point) then that data could be forwarded as
> well.  So, when exceptional conditions arise, then all data for the past n
> seconds from each data capturing device is made available to a some sort

of
> expert system/AI/symptom rules processor for further automated and/or human
> diagnosis so that it can be transmitted back to you and you can read it from

> your contact lens or whatever.  But maybe a modern mood-ring reflects that
> your blood pressure is exceeding normal ranges and that doesn't need any
> computers outside of your own set of monitoring devices to pass that info

> the ring.  So, some information needs to flow to a data hub, but some
> doesn't.
>

> > > Now, what about the fact that this could BE a database, but the
natural
> > > database (and this is where my question is) seems to be one where you

> can

> > > navigate from node to node -- individual values, rather than one where
> you
> > > treat all values of a "relation" as a set, using set operators and
all.
> > If
> > > this data were available, what would our "live" database look
> > ike? --dawn

There is (at least in theory) such a thing as a distributed RDBMS. That "navigation" is done by the DBMS "under the cover".

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! *** http://www.usenet.com Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Received on Thu May 13 2004 - 05:40:12 CDT