Toro 1

2. Toro 1 EMu on a Diet

4. Yale campus

6. Peabody CollectionsApproximate Digital Timeline

7. Peabody CollectionsApproximate Digital Timeline • 1991 Systems Office created & staffed • 1991 Argus collections databasing initiative started

8. Peabody CollectionsApproximate Digital Timeline • 1991 Systems Office created & staffed • 1991 Argus collections databasing initiative started • 1994 Gopher services launched for collections data

9. Peabody CollectionsApproximate Digital Timeline • 1991 Systems Office created & staffed • 1991 Argus collections databasing initiative started • 1994 Gopher services launched for collections data • 1997 Gopher mothballed, Web / HTTP services launched

10. Peabody CollectionsApproximate Digital Timeline • 1991 Systems Office created & staffed • 1991 Argus collections databasing initiative started • 1994 Gopher services launched for collections data • 1997 Gopher mothballed, Web / HTTP services launched • 1998 Physical move of many collections “begins” • 2002 Physical move of many collections “ends”

11. Peabody CollectionsApproximate Digital Timeline • 1991 Systems Office created & staffed • 1991 Argus collections databasing initiative started • 1994 Gopher services launched for collections data • 1997 Gopher mothballed, Web / HTTP services launched • 1998 Physical move of many collections “begins” • 2002 Physical move of many collections “ends” • 2003 Search for Argus successor commences • 2003 Informatics Office created & staffed

12. Peabody CollectionsApproximate Digital Timeline • 1991 Systems Office created & staffed • 1991 Argus collections databasing initiative started • 1994 Gopher services launched for collections data • 1997 Gopher mothballed, Web / HTTP services launched • 1998 Physical move of many collections “begins” • 2002 Physical move of many collections “ends” • 2003 Search for Argus successor commences • 2003 Informatics Office created & staffed • 2004 KE EMu to succeed Argus, data migration begins • 2005 Argus data migration ends, go-live in KE EMu

13. Big events EMu migration in '05 (all disciplines went live simultaneously) Physical move in '98-'02 (primarily neontological disciplines)

14. Peabody CollectionsCounts & Functional Cataloguing Unit • Anthropology 325,000 Lot • Botany 350,000 Individual • Entomology 400,000 Lot • Invertebrate Paleontology 300,000 Lot • Invertebrate Zoology 300,000 Lot • Mineralogy 35,000 Individual • Paleobotany 150,000 Individual • Scientific Instruments 3,000 Individual • Vertebrate Paleontology 125,000 Individual • Vertebrate Zoology 185,000 Lot / Individual About 12 million specimens ( 2.1 million EMu-able units )

15. Peabody CollectionsFunctional Units Databased • Anthropology 325,000 90 % • Botany 350,000 1 % • Entomology 400,000 6 % • Invertebrate Paleontology 300,000 60 % • Invertebrate Zoology 300,000 25 % • Mineralogy 35,000 85 % • Paleobotany 150,000 60 % • Scientific Instruments 3,000 100 % • Vertebrate Paleontology 125,000 60 % • Vertebrate Zoology 185,000 95 % 992,000 of 2.1 million ( 45 % overall )

17. What happens when …

18. What happens when … … EMu gets sluggish & unresponsive ?

19. Why is this &^%$ thing so ridiculously slow ?!

20. Transient often non-EMu issues

21. Transient often non-EMu issues Persistent underlying EMu issues

22. Persistent issues typically have at least some “local aspect” to them So you should look your EMu straight in the eye, and see if there are any local solutions that suggest themselves

23. TRUISM #1: disk speed affects database speed, so a smaller footprint of data on disk will increase performance

24. In an absolute sense, EMu proved much faster than Argus, but one intriguing metric was the amount of disk space occupied by the catalogue immediately after migration TRUISM #1: disk speed affects database speed, so a smaller footprint of data on disk will increase performance 1,380 mB 10,400 mB

25. TRUISM #2: active databases never shrink over time

28. Were there any existing diet protocols?

36. Vignettes from attempting to streamline a system, 2005-2007 EMu on a Diet

37. Vignettes from attempting to streamline a system, 2005-2007 EMu on a Diet Post-migration reassessment (2005-2006)

38. Vignettes from attempting to streamline a system, 2005-2007 EMu on a Diet Post-migration reassessment (2005-2006) Preparation for Darwin Core (2006-2007)

39. Vignettes from attempting to streamline a system, 2005-2007 EMu on a Diet Post-migration reassessment (2005-2006) Preparation for Darwin Core (2006-2007) Implications of end user habits (2007-)

40. The ecatalogue database was a rate limiter an EMu data directory

41. The ecatalogue database was a rate limiter an EMu data directory

42. The ecatalogue database was a rate limiter an EMu data directory

43. EMu maintenance jobs emulutsrebuild rebuilds lookup list tables emumaintenance batch quick & dirty optimization (oflow) emumaintenance compact full optimization of database table components

44. EMu maintenance jobs emulutsrebuild rebuilds lookup list tables emumaintenance batch quick & dirty optimization (oflow) emumaintenance compact full optimization of database table components

45. Default EMu “cron” maintenance job schedule Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su late night workday evening = emulutsrebuild = emumaintenance batch = emumaintenance compact

46. Default EMu “cron” maintenance job schedule Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su late night workday evening = emulutsrebuild = emumaintenance batch = emumaintenance compact

47. Default EMu “cron” maintenance job schedule Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su late night workday evening = emulutsrebuild = emumaintenance batch = emumaintenance compact

48. Revised EMu “cron” maintenance job schedule Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su late night workday evening = emulutsrebuild = emumaintenance batch = emumaintenance compact

49. Revised EMu “cron” maintenance job schedule Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su late night workday evening = emulutsrebuild = emumaintenance batch = emumaintenance compact

50. Revised EMu “cron” maintenance job schedule Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su late night workday evening = emulutsrebuild = emumaintenance batch = emumaintenance compact