Re: Development as Configuration

"dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> writes:
> There are other approaches for the "bump up" such as IDEs, a
> service-oriented architecture, OO with libraries of type
> definitions, various industry standards, an so on, each with its own
> charm and advances, but nothing strikes me as yet as getting us the
> next big productivity boost in application software development.
> The one I've decided really isn't going to get us there is code
> generation, so that is the one that makes me yawn the most when I
> hear it.

we were asked to do some consulting work with this small client/server startup in menlo park that wanted to do some payment transactions http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm5.htm#asrn2 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm5.htm#asrn3

they had two people that had been at oracle who we had worked with on parallel oracle
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13

for ha/cmp and scalleable distributed lock manager http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp

and were now at this startup responsible for something called the commerce server (this startup also had this technology called SSL). we worked with them on doing payment transactions and something called a payment gateway (collection somewhat now referred to as e-commerce).

we frequently advised (possibly harangued) many people at the startup that to take a typical straight forward, well designed and well tested staightline application and turn it into a sevice typically could require 4-10 times the code (of the straightline application) and ten times the effort.

a simple example was that after the straight line application was built and tested .... we built something like a five state by 20-30 possible failure mode matrix ... and required that each possible condition could be identified/diagnosed and recovered from (well documented remediation processes and possibly automated recovery). eventually had something like a 40 page diagnostic document for webserver operations and payment gateway operations (and a lot more code).

this was in somewhat the timeframe of lots of opject development platforms ... many primarily oriented towards quickly turning out fancy que toy demos. one that was around in this era was taligent. we spent a one-week JAD with taligent exploring what would be required to take their existing infrastructure and transform it into a business critical platform for deliverying service oriented application (moving a lot of the traditional service oriented operations out have having to be repeatedly reimplemented in every application ... and into the underlying platfrom). The net was an estimate of approximately 30 percent hit to their existing code base ... and approximately 1/3rd additional new frameworks (specifically oriented towards service oriented operations ... as opposed to the more commoingly found frameworks involved in screen graphics).

we even took a pass at trying to drop some number of 2167a certification requirements into the infrastructure .... attempting to significantly reduce the repeated effort involved in buidling and deploying service oriented applications.

misc. past taligent refs:

http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#46 Where are they now : Taligent and Pink
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#48 Where are they now : Taligent and Pink
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#10 Taligent
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#36 Proper ISA lifespan?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#93 Buffer overflow
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#24 Buffer overflow
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#60 Unisys A11 worth keeping?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#76 Difference between Unix and Linux?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#60 The next big things that weren't
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#45 IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#28 A Speculative question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#62 IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#15 A Dark Day
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#53 defination of terms: "Application Server" vs. "Transaction Server"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#49 "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#64 Systems software versus applications software definitions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#40 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#38 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors

misc. past business critical &/or service related postings

http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#27 Mainframes & Unix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#31 Mainframes & Unix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#32 Mainframes & Unix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#15 OSes commerical, history
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#18 Reviving the OS/360 thread (Questions about OS/360)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#51 Mainframes suck? (was Re: Possibly OT: Disney Computing)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#46 Where are they now : Taligent and Pink
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#25 what is interrupt mask register?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#16 database (or b-tree) page sizes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#56 Pentium 4 Prefetch engine?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#75 Test and Set (TS) vs Compare and Swap (CS)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#11 OCO
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#85 The demise of compaq
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#91 Buffer overflow
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#93 Buffer overflow
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#30 OS Workloads : Interactive etc
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#14 Mainframers: Take back the light (spotlight, that is)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#15 Large Banking is the only chance for Mainframe
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#11 Wanted: the SOUNDS of classic computing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#6 unix permissions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#38 Calculating expected reliability for designed system
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#23 diffence between itanium and alpha
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#62 IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#15 A Dark Day
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003p.html#37 The BASIC Variations
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#8 Mars Rover Not Responding
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#48 Automating secure transactions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004k.html#20 Vintage computers are better than modern crap !
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#49 "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#51 stop worrying about it offshoring - it's doing fine
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#56 RISCs too close to hardware?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#23 Systems software versus applications software definitions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#63 Systems software versus applications software definitions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#64 Systems software versus applications software definitions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#18 IBM, UNIVAC/SPERRY, BURROUGHS, and friends. Compare?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#40 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#42 Thou shalt have no other gods before the ANSI C standard
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#38 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#16 Today's mainframe--anything to new?

-- 
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/