.Net project failures

Discussion in 'MCSD' started by Disillusioned_01, Sep 14, 2004.

  1. Having recently moved on to a BA role (After studying .Net for a while and
    passing couple of ms.net exams )
    I have witnessed couple of failed projects in .Net . Thought I might share
    my sadness
    Let me outline the project failed (Brief Discription)
    Client: (namewithheld)
    Supplier: (namewithheld from India(They are learning)) (But word is that MS
    brains got involved in last minute)
    Requirement: Handle 600 - 800 transations /Sec on Peak Hours
    30-40 tables per Transaction / Numerous updates and inserts/ Little CPU more
    IO due to DB
    After shelling out few million dollars the project died since it
    cannot match (not even close) legacy Performance offered by IBM
    Personally I am quite sad at this outcome
    Beacause
    a. A Initial Development opportunity in .Net lost so other .net initiatives
    are shelved
    b.Missed chance to Kick IBM on butt !
    c.>net developers had to shelf their desire to be on a good organisation
    for long
    d.Afraid that it sent wrong signals to other IT managers especially during
    friday drinking time ....

    And this is not the only project that has been failed
    in .Net due to peformance implications
    I personally know at least 1 other project .
    I can't help wondering how many more are there

    I wonder does anybody has been involved in project with
    such performance implications
    Any comments appreciated
    ------------------
     
    Disillusioned_01, Sep 14, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. >Requirement: Handle 600 - 800 transations /Sec on Peak Hours
    >30-40 tables per Transaction / Numerous updates and inserts/ Little CPU more
    >IO due to DB


    Simply down to poor infrastructure planning/understanding - don't tell
    me, single database server!!! please don't say yes....

    How application servers in the farm?

    How many of those transactions come through the wan? How many web
    servers in the farm?

    I was involved with a banking system back in 1998 which was expected
    to be able to handle 100,000 secure 'business transactions' an hour
    (peek time = 1 to 1.5 hours per day), which is somewhat less than your
    scenario, however this involved :-

    32 web servers dual PII 450 512 ram.

    Initially 16 application servers (same spec as the web server's I
    think)

    There were four Oracle database servers running on AIX (big spec
    machines)

    The whole system, as a result of performance testing was determined to
    have a [theoretical] functional limit of about one million business
    transaction per hour. In reality, the system never received more than
    10,000 business transaction an hour, even at peek time, so the real
    winner was idle time!

    The main reason for the success of the system was the excellent
    communication between the ms, ibm and oracle consultants, there was no
    inter company bickering whatsoever - we would not have tolerated that
    anyway!

    Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
     
    The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere, Sep 14, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. >And this is not the only project that has been failed
    >in .Net due to peformance implications


    The development tools have nothing to do with why projects fail.
    Projects fail because of incompetence brought about by stupidity and
    ignorance. This project would just have likely have failed if it were
    being developed on the j2ee platform.

    Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
     
    The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere, Sep 14, 2004
    #3
  4. Disillusioned_01

    Hermit Dave Guest

    well as far as concurrent transactions are concerned (without considering
    the 30-40 table inserts) DB2 is the best thing. Read an article on
    concurrent transactions databases..
    SQL Server was almost as good as Oracle but DB2 is way ahead (more than
    twice as many as oracle and still going strong).

    As my bro once put it a few years back... DB2 had to be scaled down to make
    it work on *nix / NT. Where as Oracle / Sql Server and the rest of them had
    to be scaled up from uni-processor arch to use more than 1..

    --

    Regards,

    Hermit Dave
    (http://hdave.blogspot.com)
    "Disillusioned_01" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Having recently moved on to a BA role (After studying .Net for a while and
    > passing couple of ms.net exams )
    > I have witnessed couple of failed projects in .Net . Thought I might
    > share
    > my sadness
    > Let me outline the project failed (Brief Discription)
    > Client: (namewithheld)
    > Supplier: (namewithheld from India(They are learning)) (But word is that
    > MS
    > brains got involved in last minute)
    > Requirement: Handle 600 - 800 transations /Sec on Peak Hours
    > 30-40 tables per Transaction / Numerous updates and inserts/ Little CPU
    > more
    > IO due to DB
    > After shelling out few million dollars the project died since it
    > cannot match (not even close) legacy Performance offered by IBM
    > Personally I am quite sad at this outcome
    > Beacause
    > a. A Initial Development opportunity in .Net lost so other .net
    > initiatives
    > are shelved
    > b.Missed chance to Kick IBM on butt !
    > c.>net developers had to shelf their desire to be on a good organisation
    > for long
    > d.Afraid that it sent wrong signals to other IT managers especially during
    > friday drinking time ....
    >
    > And this is not the only project that has been failed
    > in .Net due to peformance implications
    > I personally know at least 1 other project .
    > I can't help wondering how many more are there
    >
    > I wonder does anybody has been involved in project with
    > such performance implications
    > Any comments appreciated
    > ------------------
    >
    >
     
    Hermit Dave, Sep 14, 2004
    #4
  5. >As my bro once put it a few years back... DB2 had to be scaled down to make
    >it work on *nix / NT. Where as Oracle / Sql Server and the rest of them had
    >to be scaled up from uni-processor arch to use more than 1..


    nice.

    Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
     
    The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere, Sep 14, 2004
    #5
  6. Disillusioned_01

    Guest Guest

    Is inserting into 40 tables per transaction really a business requirement or
    just the result of poor database design? I bet they didn't even start with a
    proven industry specific meta model or hire professional database developers
    to do the work. They probably just gave each programmer a DBO login and let
    them do their own thang.
    WKidd

    "Disillusioned_01" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Having recently moved on to a BA role (After studying .Net for a while and
    > passing couple of ms.net exams )
    > I have witnessed couple of failed projects in .Net . Thought I might

    share
    > my sadness
    > Let me outline the project failed (Brief Discription)
    > Client: (namewithheld)
    > Supplier: (namewithheld from India(They are learning)) (But word is that

    MS
    > brains got involved in last minute)
    > Requirement: Handle 600 - 800 transations /Sec on Peak Hours
    > 30-40 tables per Transaction / Numerous updates and inserts/ Little CPU

    more
    > IO due to DB
    > After shelling out few million dollars the project died since it
    > cannot match (not even close) legacy Performance offered by IBM
    > Personally I am quite sad at this outcome
    > Beacause
    > a. A Initial Development opportunity in .Net lost so other .net

    initiatives
    > are shelved
    > b.Missed chance to Kick IBM on butt !
    > c.>net developers had to shelf their desire to be on a good organisation
    > for long
    > d.Afraid that it sent wrong signals to other IT managers especially during
    > friday drinking time ....
    >
    > And this is not the only project that has been failed
    > in .Net due to peformance implications
    > I personally know at least 1 other project .
    > I can't help wondering how many more are there
    >
    > I wonder does anybody has been involved in project with
    > such performance implications
    > Any comments appreciated
    > ------------------
    >
    >
     
    Guest, Sep 16, 2004
    #6
  7. Disillusioned_01

    bb Guest

    The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere wrote:

    >>And this is not the only project that has been failed
    >>in .Net due to peformance implications

    >
    >
    > The development tools have nothing to do with why projects fail.
    > Projects fail because of incompetence brought about by stupidity and
    > ignorance. This project would just have likely have failed if it were
    > being developed on the j2ee platform.
    >
    > Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3


    here here.



    --
    ------------------------
    Think your smart?
    Prove your programming power @ the OSI Geek Challenges
    http://www.osix.net
    ------------------------
     
    bb, Sep 16, 2004
    #7
  8. Well please consider this a reply for every kind folk(and not so kind 'I
    knew it all' teens)
    We had an investment on existing application which took 7 years to develop(I
    don't want hear some ignorant yelling
    then some thing wrong with it at this point we did not have off shelf
    applications @ that point in time ) on a db2 /MVS(Recent upgrade dont pick
    on it)
    all we done was to replace existing application using IBM prop hardware with
    ..Net /mq front end.
    Well we thought MS guys would know something about app performance

    I know(in theory) if you put an oracle 10 g Federated Server and some
    machines around it It would work
    well it is just that this little customised applications having around 900+
    tables can't be ported
    that easily

    To kline it was only one DB (But I am not ashamed yet because it still
    works )


    "Hermit Dave" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > well as far as concurrent transactions are concerned (without considering
    > the 30-40 table inserts) DB2 is the best thing. Read an article on
    > concurrent transactions databases..
    > SQL Server was almost as good as Oracle but DB2 is way ahead (more than
    > twice as many as oracle and still going strong).
    >
    > As my bro once put it a few years back... DB2 had to be scaled down to

    make
    > it work on *nix / NT. Where as Oracle / Sql Server and the rest of them

    had
    > to be scaled up from uni-processor arch to use more than 1..
    >
    > --
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Hermit Dave
    > (http://hdave.blogspot.com)
    > "Disillusioned_01" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Having recently moved on to a BA role (After studying .Net for a while

    and
    > > passing couple of ms.net exams )
    > > I have witnessed couple of failed projects in .Net . Thought I might
    > > share
    > > my sadness
    > > Let me outline the project failed (Brief Discription)
    > > Client: (namewithheld)
    > > Supplier: (namewithheld from India(They are learning)) (But word is that
    > > MS
    > > brains got involved in last minute)
    > > Requirement: Handle 600 - 800 transations /Sec on Peak Hours
    > > 30-40 tables per Transaction / Numerous updates and inserts/ Little CPU
    > > more
    > > IO due to DB
    > > After shelling out few million dollars the project died since it
    > > cannot match (not even close) legacy Performance offered by IBM
    > > Personally I am quite sad at this outcome
    > > Beacause
    > > a. A Initial Development opportunity in .Net lost so other .net
    > > initiatives
    > > are shelved
    > > b.Missed chance to Kick IBM on butt !
    > > c.>net developers had to shelf their desire to be on a good

    organisation
    > > for long
    > > d.Afraid that it sent wrong signals to other IT managers especially

    during
    > > friday drinking time ....
    > >
    > > And this is not the only project that has been failed
    > > in .Net due to peformance implications
    > > I personally know at least 1 other project .
    > > I can't help wondering how many more are there
    > >
    > > I wonder does anybody has been involved in project with
    > > such performance implications
    > > Any comments appreciated
    > > ------------------
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Disillusioned_01, Sep 16, 2004
    #8
  9. Guess so. But thanx for your insight!!
    "The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere" <.> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >And this is not the only project that has been failed
    > >in .Net due to peformance implications

    >
    > The development tools have nothing to do with why projects fail.
    > Projects fail because of incompetence brought about by stupidity and
    > ignorance. This project would just have likely have failed if it were
    > being developed on the j2ee platform.
    >
    > Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
     
    Disillusioned_01, Sep 16, 2004
    #9
  10. thanx . In don't have any practial experience in scaling up/out
    web farms. Will try to read more
    "The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere" <.> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >Requirement: Handle 600 - 800 transations /Sec on Peak Hours
    > >30-40 tables per Transaction / Numerous updates and inserts/ Little CPU

    more
    > >IO due to DB

    >
    > Simply down to poor infrastructure planning/understanding - don't tell
    > me, single database server!!! please don't say yes....
    >
    > How application servers in the farm?
    >
    > How many of those transactions come through the wan? How many web
    > servers in the farm?
    >
    > I was involved with a banking system back in 1998 which was expected
    > to be able to handle 100,000 secure 'business transactions' an hour
    > (peek time = 1 to 1.5 hours per day), which is somewhat less than your
    > scenario, however this involved :-
    >
    > 32 web servers dual PII 450 512 ram.
    >
    > Initially 16 application servers (same spec as the web server's I
    > think)
    >
    > There were four Oracle database servers running on AIX (big spec
    > machines)
    >
    > The whole system, as a result of performance testing was determined to
    > have a [theoretical] functional limit of about one million business
    > transaction per hour. In reality, the system never received more than
    > 10,000 business transaction an hour, even at peek time, so the real
    > winner was idle time!
    >
    > The main reason for the success of the system was the excellent
    > communication between the ms, ibm and oracle consultants, there was no
    > inter company bickering whatsoever - we would not have tolerated that
    > anyway!
    >
    > Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
     
    Disillusioned_01, Sep 16, 2004
    #10
  11. Disillusioned_01

    Jeff Cochran Guest

    On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 13:34:15 +0100, "Hermit Dave"
    <> wrote:

    >well as far as concurrent transactions are concerned (without considering
    >the 30-40 table inserts) DB2 is the best thing. Read an article on
    >concurrent transactions databases..


    Using DB2 doesn't preclude a .NET solution. :)

    Jeff
     
    Jeff Cochran, Sep 16, 2004
    #11
  12. Disillusioned_01

    Hermit Dave Guest

    Yes i know. but you have to settle for oledb objects instead of managed
    objects. that was just wishful thinking on my part when i read the post.
    Infact i have never used DB2 and i dont know if i ever will a part of that
    knowledge was thanks to my bro (who i thought would have been excited about
    Oracle having VM - as another friend of mine.. he couldnt contain himself...
    lol.. but my bro's not too bad in what he does.. he turned about and said...
    wont help when the rest of it is so crap.. lmao... at that time he made the
    statement

    .. I donot know what went wrong. but again i do not know the architecture.
    In you have 40 table inserts at what point was this determined. My guess is
    before the MQ (we all live for the best middle-tier). So for any given task
    how many calls were being made across MQ ?

    most of the times its not about the technology but how it was used.

    But then there are times when you have a procedural code probably written in
    C having non of the problems (except being costly to maintain). Thats the
    decision made by arch's. the design could have had a very very basic flaw...
    and i work in finance. People here steamroll into the project and realise
    they are in deep sh^t half way through the project when they have spent a
    5 - 10 milllion quid.

    enough irony.. i use layered coding. Its like people using 4th normal
    databases cause ER is so perfect.. you know how much it costs to do a query
    or insert.
    Consider web arch. - the databases are slightly denormalised just go get a
    better performance. So again blame the architect.

    --

    Regards,

    Hermit Dave
    (http://hdave.blogspot.com)
    "Jeff Cochran" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 13:34:15 +0100, "Hermit Dave"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >well as far as concurrent transactions are concerned (without considering
    > >the 30-40 table inserts) DB2 is the best thing. Read an article on
    > >concurrent transactions databases..

    >
    > Using DB2 doesn't preclude a .NET solution. :)
    >
    > Jeff
     
    Hermit Dave, Sep 16, 2004
    #12
  13. Disillusioned_01

    Guest Guest

    I would have thought the same if I was just out uni like
    you
    >-----Original Message-----
    >Is inserting into 40 tables per transaction really a

    business requirement or
    >just the result of poor database design? I bet they

    didn't even start with a
    >proven industry specific meta model or hire professional

    database developers
    >to do the work. They probably just gave each programmer a

    DBO login and let
    >them do their own thang.
    >WKidd
    >
    >"Disillusioned_01" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Having recently moved on to a BA role (After

    studying .Net for a while and
    >> passing couple of ms.net exams )
    >> I have witnessed couple of failed projects in .Net .

    Thought I might
    >share
    >> my sadness
    >> Let me outline the project failed (Brief Discription)
    >> Client: (namewithheld)
    >> Supplier: (namewithheld from India(They are learning))

    (But word is that
    >MS
    >> brains got involved in last minute)
    >> Requirement: Handle 600 - 800 transations /Sec on Peak

    Hours
    >> 30-40 tables per Transaction / Numerous updates and

    inserts/ Little CPU
    >more
    >> IO due to DB
    >> After shelling out few million dollars the project died

    since it
    >> cannot match (not even close) legacy Performance

    offered by IBM
    >> Personally I am quite sad at this outcome
    >> Beacause
    >> a. A Initial Development opportunity in .Net lost so

    other .net
    >initiatives
    >> are shelved
    >> b.Missed chance to Kick IBM on butt !
    >> c.>net developers had to shelf their desire to be on a

    good organisation
    >> for long
    >> d.Afraid that it sent wrong signals to other IT

    managers especially during
    >> friday drinking time ....
    >>
    >> And this is not the only project that has been failed
    >> in .Net due to peformance implications
    >> I personally know at least 1 other project .
    >> I can't help wondering how many more are there
    >>
    >> I wonder does anybody has been involved in project with
    >> such performance implications
    >> Any comments appreciated
    >> ------------------
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    >.
    >
     
    Guest, Sep 17, 2004
    #13
  14. >I would have thought the same if I was just out uni like
    >you


    care to explain how you arrived at this conclusion?

    Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
     
    The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere, Sep 17, 2004
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?Sm9uIEdyZWVu?=

    WLAN driver failures after re-install

    =?Utf-8?B?Sm9uIEdyZWVu?=, Aug 24, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    420
    =?Utf-8?B?Sm9uIEdyZWVu?=
    Aug 24, 2005
  2. McSpreader

    Belkin Wireless Router PSU failures

    McSpreader, Sep 29, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    4,403
    James Gockel
    Mar 12, 2006
  3. Rocky_T_Squirrel, Esq.

    Ddhelp failures

    Rocky_T_Squirrel, Esq., Jul 20, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    437
    Rocky_T_Squirrel, Esq.
    Jul 20, 2004
  4. Josef Gonko

    .NET Framework 2.0: x64 (KB829019) failures

    Josef Gonko, Dec 17, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,391
    Josef Gonko
    Dec 18, 2005
  5. NZed
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    418
Loading...

Share This Page