Breaking News
Blog

Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database

-
NO RATINGS
< Previous Page 2 / 2
View Comments: Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Neo10
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
Neo10   12/7/2010 4:46:55 AM
NO RATINGS
While most agree that OA has failed in universal acceptance it still has the potential to be leveraged as an Open database standard. In part it depends on Cadence relinquishing some of it's IP rights and others taking up OA and adding to it to make it really unified. Or left to itself the industry will gravitate towards two or three camps of database technologies and face insurmountable problems in the long run. For a start the top EDA companies should come together and come out with some kind of a compromise and hand it over to Accellera or another such independent entity to take it forward.

John McGehee
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
John McGehee   12/9/2010 4:45:12 PM
NO RATINGS
The OpenAccess Coalition Scripting Languages Working Group has Perl, Python, Ruby and Tcl ready for action: http://www.pr-inside.com/new-contributions-ease-adoption-of-r2298621.htm Synopsys did the Tcl binding. I might do C#. Which scripting language did Mentor want? I have made two code contributions to OpenAccess. It's possible but difficult because only Cadence is allowed to change the core database code. To get even a production tested bug fix into OpenAccess, it took well over a year plus pressure from a powerful OpenAccess Coalition member. Magma seems to have done okay with a central database strategy.

John McGehee
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
John McGehee   12/9/2010 5:07:07 PM
NO RATINGS
And as those who attended the OpenAccess Conference in October know, Cadence has started to add multithreading support to OpenAccess. http://si2.org/?page=1282

dhrods
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
dhrods   12/9/2010 7:52:28 PM
NO RATINGS
Linda makes some great observations about the practical realities of Silicon Realization—I think we all agree on the problem although I think there are some misconceptions about the OpenAccess program and progress to date. Cadence believes strongly that a common database is important to the industry and has remained steadfastly committed for the past eight years. Since 2002, Cadence has contributed and maintained more than 90 engineer-years of code at our own expense. We actively participate in the community and provide input to architectural and priority decisions. The community owns OA content. Cadence has no IP rights other than those granted to us by the community. The community leadership is comprised of other major EDA players as well as heavyweight product companies. Cadence works in this community for the good of the industry which in turn benefits Cadence. The community is releasing 22.41, due by the end of 2010, which supports multi-threading. The community has recently released new scripting language bindings for Tcl, Python, and Ruby which are available for beta now. The binding code is designed to be easy for the community to download and support. There are many companies both on the EDA side and the design side that depend on OA every day. These companies are all very well aware of the continued improvements in database capability. The community sees this through the evidence of continued and accelerating adoption. OA was never envisioned to optimally support every algorithm known to EDA. OA’s primary goal is interoperability. There are some applications that will work well with an in-memory model and some that don’t. The point is to have a common place to store and access design data so it can be shared across applications and design teams. OA delivers a common repository to store data and access it either through C++ APIs or various scripting languages built on top of OA…a huge improvement compared to what the industry has had in the past.

DAVID.DESHARNAIS_#1
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
DAVID.DESHARNAIS_#1   12/9/2010 9:04:25 PM
NO RATINGS
Richard Goering gives "inside" scoop: http://bit.ly/gJZb5f

delta33
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
delta33   12/10/2010 7:14:57 AM
NO RATINGS
Gee, here's a nice article from Mentor Graphics' web site which starts out like this: "Now that almost all of the major custom design tools run on OpenAccess, we often get asked about how well Calibre supports OpenAccess (OA). The truth is that Calibre has supported reading polygonal data from OA since February 2007 and we have kept up with the new releases of OA as they come along" Here's the full link, you'll probably have to cut/paste it, but if a problem, just go to Mentor web site and search for OpenAccess. http://www.mentor.com/products/ic_nanometer_design/blog/post/running-calibre-from-an-openaccess-database-12ade244-ee25-43a4-aa63-c8250f6f26eb

delta33
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
delta33   12/10/2010 7:20:43 AM
NO RATINGS
Yes, but Magma's new Titan AMS platform also supports OpenAccess http://www.magma-da.com/company/company.aspx?id=2606&terms=openaccess

delta33
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
delta33   12/10/2010 7:27:46 AM
NO RATINGS
Accellera has, what,14 member companies, Si2 has over 100, who more represents the industry? Just look at the Si2 Board of Directors, and yes, Cadence and Synopsys are both on there. http://www.si2.org/?page=65

Magma Rocks!
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
Magma Rocks!   12/11/2010 12:36:33 AM
NO RATINGS
To build a best in class interoperable product, you don’t need OA in-memory database, but you absolutely need to use OA API. If you have a product that uses in-memory OA database but does not add any more value than the incumbent, then you are not going to overcome user inertia to adopt your product. Your product needs to provide value (productivity or quality of design etc.) while providing interoperability using OA API. That's how we are making our Titan customers using OA successful.

DataMuncher
User Rank
Rookie
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
DataMuncher   12/13/2010 3:28:57 PM
NO RATINGS
Mentor is horribly schizophrenic on OA. Calibre supports, analog tools do not (maybe some weak translation). Analog tools continue to gimp along on AMPL, a language developed back in the Falcon Framework days.

Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
EE Times editor Junko Yoshida grills two executives --Rick Walker, senior product marketing manager for IoT and home automation for CSR, and Jim Reich, CTO and co-founder at Palatehome.
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week