Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Some notes on MUMPS V1 on the Raspberry Pi.
330 views
Skip to first unread message
Ray Newman
Jul 9, 2012, 7:01:28 PM7/9/12
to
When I first wrote my long running application 'ONE' in April 1981, it was using DSM-11 on a PDP 11/23 (10 KHz) with 248 KB of RAM and 20 MB of disk that cost us in the vicinity of $40,000. Now I am running ONE under MUMPS V1 on a Raspberry Pi (700 MHz) with 256 MB of RAM and 8 GB of disk (SSD) that cost me $40.
To compare these two environments, we start with the raw processor speed where the Pi is 70,000 times faster; factor the 11/23 being CISC and the ARM being RISC and assume 10,000 times faster. Benchmarks have shown MUMPS V1 is about 10 times slower that DSM-11, VAX-DSM etc - it is, after all, written in poor c; where the DSMs were assembly. We now assume that the application under MUMPS V1 on the Pi is about 1000 times the speed of the same application on the 11/23.
On the 11/23, we could run up to 20 terminals (interactive jobs). We could, perhaps, run 20,000 jobs on the Pi but I think not given the RAM and disk limitations. Over the years (30 of them), ONE has also become a little more cumbersome. Also, MUMPS V1 is much less frugal with rescorces than DSM; so I estimate we could run (slowly) the best part of 200 jobs on the Pi as long as we were not trying to also use a graphics head on it.
Not bad value when stated that way.
Ray
To compare these two environments, we start with the raw processor speed where the Pi is 70,000 times faster; factor the 11/23 being CISC and the ARM being RISC and assume 10,000 times faster. Benchmarks have shown MUMPS V1 is about 10 times slower that DSM-11, VAX-DSM etc - it is, after all, written in poor c; where the DSMs were assembly. We now assume that the application under MUMPS V1 on the Pi is about 1000 times the speed of the same application on the 11/23.
On the 11/23, we could run up to 20 terminals (interactive jobs). We could, perhaps, run 20,000 jobs on the Pi but I think not given the RAM and disk limitations. Over the years (30 of them), ONE has also become a little more cumbersome. Also, MUMPS V1 is much less frugal with rescorces than DSM; so I estimate we could run (slowly) the best part of 200 jobs on the Pi as long as we were not trying to also use a graphics head on it.
Not bad value when stated that way.
Ray
Steve Graham
Jul 10, 2012, 10:43:35 AM7/10/12
to
that of MUMPS still stuns me. I've only come across 1 other language
that could do something similar: Forth. And it did not have an
embedded database.
It reminds me of a number of things:
1) One fellow running an accounting firm with multiple terminals running
off of a PC-AT; and
2) Replacing a clinic's PDP (with terminals, printers and batch jobs)
with a 386 or 486. In this case the accounting batch jobs, which needed
to be run at night on the PDP, were able to run during the day with no
ill effect on the interactive jobs.
Ray - Why did you write your own MUMPS? What is the function of ONE?
Steve
Ray Newman
Jul 10, 2012, 6:44:54 PM7/10/12
to
Forth is a good one also - I worked on a cash register that ran Forth years ago.
We were replacing PDP-11s running DSM-11 with 386s running MSM in the nineties; could run a large number of terminals too.
I went for my own MUMPS as the price of the commercial offerings went through the roof once Intersystems got control of DSM and MSM. It took three of us about 12 months to get it up.
ONE is a total commercial system; Ledger, Inventory, Payroll, Debtors, Creditors, Invoicing/Sales, Purchasing, etc, etc - all totally integrated in one database. We had a couple of hundred customers at one stage. Now I've let it die (one customer left).
Ray
We were replacing PDP-11s running DSM-11 with 386s running MSM in the nineties; could run a large number of terminals too.
I went for my own MUMPS as the price of the commercial offerings went through the roof once Intersystems got control of DSM and MSM. It took three of us about 12 months to get it up.
ONE is a total commercial system; Ledger, Inventory, Payroll, Debtors, Creditors, Invoicing/Sales, Purchasing, etc, etc - all totally integrated in one database. We had a couple of hundred customers at one stage. Now I've let it die (one customer left).
Ray
ssu....@gmail.com
Jul 11, 2012, 11:23:13 AM7/11/12
to
>
> Ray
Hello Ray,
Have you plans to continue using ONE commercially ? If not, any thoughts to open source it ? It would be great to let other people have a look to such an application. There are not much FOSS apps in MUMPS (apart from VistA) as far as I know. I would be happy to look at your code, escpecially if there is some documentation explaining things...
Ray Newman
Jul 11, 2012, 4:23:40 PM7/11/12
to
On Thursday, 12 July 2012 01:23:13 UTC+10, (unknown) wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 1:44:54 AM UTC+3, Ray Newman wrote:
> > Forth is a good one also - I worked on a cash register that ran Forth years ago.
> On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 1:44:54 AM UTC+3, Ray Newman wrote:
> >
> > We were replacing PDP-11s running DSM-11 with 386s running MSM in the nineties; could run a large number of terminals too.
> >
> > I went for my own MUMPS as the price of the commercial offerings went through the roof once Intersystems got control of DSM and MSM. It took three of us about 12 months to get it up.
> >
> > ONE is a total commercial system; Ledger, Inventory, Payroll, Debtors, Creditors, Invoicing/Sales, Purchasing, etc, etc - all totally integrated in one database. We had a couple of hundred customers at one stage. Now I've let it die (one customer left).
> >
> > Ray
>
> Hello Ray,
>
> Have you plans to continue using ONE commercially ? If not, any thoughts to open source it ? It would be great to let other people have a look to such an application. There are not much FOSS apps in MUMPS (apart from VistA) as far as I know. I would be happy to look at your code, escpecially if there is some documentation explaining things...
What's your MUMPS experience?
> Hello Ray,
>
> Have you plans to continue using ONE commercially ? If not, any thoughts to open source it ? It would be great to let other people have a look to such an application. There are not much FOSS apps in MUMPS (apart from VistA) as far as I know. I would be happy to look at your code, escpecially if there is some documentation explaining things...
Ray
OldMster
Jul 11, 2012, 4:40:15 PM7/11/12
to
Hi Ray,
Different person than (unknown), but if you are considering the suggestion, I'd love to look at it as well, if for no other reason to get rid of the awful piece of software called QuickBooks. I could write my own, but that takes time away from the paying business..... If there was an OSS M application I could contribute a few bits to, that would be a worthwhile effort.
I've been writing in Mumps for longer than I care to admit now. I started out with CCSM on DOS 286 PC's, worked on DSM on PDP-11's, VAX, and Alpha, ported the code and the data first to DataTree, then Cache, and now moving it to GT.M. Not quite as much fun as it was writing the code to convert the data from DSM backups made to 9 track into Datatree, but still challenging enough to get me to work everyday!
My education was as an accountant, you know, back in the day when all the computers were in accounting, and I had 10 whole hours of computer courses in college, so I was put in charge of them....
My business is primarily in clinical labs these days, although I still support the first software I wrote in M - a tenant management system that included shared phone service billing.
Mark
Different person than (unknown), but if you are considering the suggestion, I'd love to look at it as well, if for no other reason to get rid of the awful piece of software called QuickBooks. I could write my own, but that takes time away from the paying business..... If there was an OSS M application I could contribute a few bits to, that would be a worthwhile effort.
I've been writing in Mumps for longer than I care to admit now. I started out with CCSM on DOS 286 PC's, worked on DSM on PDP-11's, VAX, and Alpha, ported the code and the data first to DataTree, then Cache, and now moving it to GT.M. Not quite as much fun as it was writing the code to convert the data from DSM backups made to 9 track into Datatree, but still challenging enough to get me to work everyday!
My education was as an accountant, you know, back in the day when all the computers were in accounting, and I had 10 whole hours of computer courses in college, so I was put in charge of them....
My business is primarily in clinical labs these days, although I still support the first software I wrote in M - a tenant management system that included shared phone service billing.
Mark
Ray Newman
Jul 11, 2012, 5:43:08 PM7/11/12
to
On Thursday, 12 July 2012 06:40:15 UTC+10, OldMster wrote:
> Hi Ray,
> Different person than (unknown), but if you are considering the suggestion, I'd love to look at it as well, if for no other reason to get rid of the awful piece of software called QuickBooks. I could write my own, but that takes time away from the paying business..... If there was an OSS M application I could contribute a few bits to, that would be a worthwhile effort.
> Hi Ray,
>
> I've been writing in Mumps for longer than I care to admit now. I started out with CCSM on DOS 286 PC's, worked on DSM on PDP-11's, VAX, and Alpha, ported the code and the data first to DataTree, then Cache, and now moving it to GT.M. Not quite as much fun as it was writing the code to convert the data from DSM backups made to 9 track into Datatree, but still challenging enough to get me to work everyday!
>
> My education was as an accountant, you know, back in the day when all the computers were in accounting, and I had 10 whole hours of computer courses in college, so I was put in charge of them....
>
> My business is primarily in clinical labs these days, although I still support the first software I wrote in M - a tenant management system that included shared phone service billing.
>
> Mark
You should consider MUMPS V1 for your software. Other than the lack of Zcommands and Zfunctions, it's quite similar to DSM. I wrote it that way to ease my conversion. GTM, of course, has the advantage of being the quicker implementation.
> My education was as an accountant, you know, back in the day when all the computers were in accounting, and I had 10 whole hours of computer courses in college, so I was put in charge of them....
>
> My business is primarily in clinical labs these days, although I still support the first software I wrote in M - a tenant management system that included shared phone service billing.
>
> Mark
I will look at either a limited or full release of the ONE source next week.
Ray
geky
Jul 12, 2012, 4:38:35 PM7/12/12
to
On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 2:01:28 AM UTC+3, Ray Newman wrote:
> When I first wrote my long running application 'ONE' in April 1981, it was using DSM-11 on a PDP 11/23 (10 KHz) with 248 KB of RAM and 20 MB of disk that cost us in the vicinity of $40,000. Now I am running ONE under MUMPS V1 on a Raspberry Pi (700 MHz) with 256 MB of RAM and 8 GB of disk (SSD) that cost me $40.
I wasn't register in this group, so I posted anonymously, sorry about that.
My first contact with MUMPS goes back to the 90's, it was Intersystem's M11+
running on a PDP 11/73. After that, I wrote code using MSM, then Cache and
now GT.M. Recently, I downloaded MUMPS V1, and plan to give it a try in the
near future.
Currently I am (re)-writing some of my applications using extesively FileMan
data structures and other VistA based tools. Among them is a payroll system
and a double entry accounting application as well, so I have a strong desire
to look at your code to benefit from your experience, allthough I am aware
of the differences because of legislative regulations influencing the bussines
rules of such systems. (I am located in Greece).
It would be very nice to see a MUMPS based FOSS project arising about these
subjects, which would possibly intergrate different views in a unified software
solution.
Greetings
> When I first wrote my long running application 'ONE' in April 1981, it was using DSM-11 on a PDP 11/23 (10 KHz) with 248 KB of RAM and 20 MB of disk that cost us in the vicinity of $40,000. Now I am running ONE under MUMPS V1 on a Raspberry Pi (700 MHz) with 256 MB of RAM and 8 GB of disk (SSD) that cost me $40.
My first contact with MUMPS goes back to the 90's, it was Intersystem's M11+
running on a PDP 11/73. After that, I wrote code using MSM, then Cache and
now GT.M. Recently, I downloaded MUMPS V1, and plan to give it a try in the
near future.
Currently I am (re)-writing some of my applications using extesively FileMan
data structures and other VistA based tools. Among them is a payroll system
and a double entry accounting application as well, so I have a strong desire
to look at your code to benefit from your experience, allthough I am aware
of the differences because of legislative regulations influencing the bussines
rules of such systems. (I am located in Greece).
It would be very nice to see a MUMPS based FOSS project arising about these
subjects, which would possibly intergrate different views in a unified software
solution.
Greetings
Ray Newman
Jul 13, 2012, 2:24:27 AM7/13/12
to
On Friday, 13 July 2012 06:38:35 UTC+10, geky wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 2:01:28 AM UTC+3, Ray Newman wrote:
> > When I first wrote my long running application 'ONE' in April 1981, it was using DSM-11 on a PDP 11/23 (10 KHz) with 248 KB of RAM and 20 MB of disk that cost us in the vicinity of $40,000. Now I am running ONE under MUMPS V1 on a Raspberry Pi (700 MHz) with 256 MB of RAM and 8 GB of disk (SSD) that cost me $40.
> On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 2:01:28 AM UTC+3, Ray Newman wrote:
> >
> > To compare these two environments, we start with the raw processor speed where the Pi is 70,000 times faster; factor the 11/23 being CISC and the ARM being RISC and assume 10,000 times faster. Benchmarks have shown MUMPS V1 is about 10 times slower that DSM-11, VAX-DSM etc - it is, after all, written in poor c; where the DSMs were assembly. We now assume that the application under MUMPS V1 on the Pi is about 1000 times the speed of the same application on the 11/23.
> >
> > On the 11/23, we could run up to 20 terminals (interactive jobs). We could, perhaps, run 20,000 jobs on the Pi but I think not given the RAM and disk limitations. Over the years (30 of them), ONE has also become a little more cumbersome. Also, MUMPS V1 is much less frugal with rescorces than DSM; so I estimate we could run (slowly) the best part of 200 jobs on the Pi as long as we were not trying to also use a graphics head on it.
> >
> > Not bad value when stated that way.
> >
> > Ray
>
>
> I wasn't register in this group, so I posted anonymously, sorry about that.
>
> My first contact with MUMPS goes back to the 90's, it was Intersystem's M11+
> running on a PDP 11/73. After that, I wrote code using MSM, then Cache and
> now GT.M. Recently, I downloaded MUMPS V1, and plan to give it a try in the
> near future.
>
> Currently I am (re)-writing some of my applications using extesively FileMan
> data structures and other VistA based tools. Among them is a payroll system
> and a double entry accounting application as well, so I have a strong desire
> to look at your code to benefit from your experience, allthough I am aware
> of the differences because of legislative regulations influencing the bussines
> rules of such systems. (I am located in Greece).
>
> It would be very nice to see a MUMPS based FOSS project arising about these
> subjects, which would possibly intergrate different views in a unified software
> solution.
>
> Greetings
Hi, I am not familiar with Fileman code but a few others have helped me to get it up under MUMPS V1 - see http://sourceforge.net/projects/mumps/files/mumps-vista-1.55.tar.gz/download for a database including running Fileman (just add executable).
> now GT.M. Recently, I downloaded MUMPS V1, and plan to give it a try in the
> near future.
>
> Currently I am (re)-writing some of my applications using extesively FileMan
> data structures and other VistA based tools. Among them is a payroll system
> and a double entry accounting application as well, so I have a strong desire
> to look at your code to benefit from your experience, allthough I am aware
> of the differences because of legislative regulations influencing the bussines
> rules of such systems. (I am located in Greece).
>
> It would be very nice to see a MUMPS based FOSS project arising about these
> subjects, which would possibly intergrate different views in a unified software
> solution.
>
> Greetings
Ray
0 new messages