A number of people have stated that SPT and/or SP are superior to RV for Data Servers and applications like Intranet Servers.
I can't help but perceive that many/most of the reported deficiencies of RVs are substantially improved in a Tiered or Internet environment.
What gives rise to this perception?
Is that you, JVP? < g > -- John Ryan
Certainly the security and scalability issues become moot.
How can issues of security and scalability be moot?
I am talking about "reported deficiencies" of RVs, not the entire issue of security and scalability. Check out my second sentence above- I agree the flow isn't so clear now it is broken up by questions.
Reported deficiencies of RVs are well stated elsewhere. They include scalability and security. I am saying that in a true tiered or Internet environment, client devices will not have direct access to the database or the dbc at all, which means that the "reported security concerns" of RV vs others are managed. As for scalability: if a site has 1000 users accessing our app at once, we can probably deliver good performance with 4 VFP COM servers on a decent platform or platforms. You are not going to see the dbc contentions that some people experience with large numbers of clients accessing dbc directly. -- John Ryan
We currently use both RVs and SPT for our server applications which include HTTP servers that largely eliminate the need for ODBC on client PCs. We think this will increasingly become the norm.
Why do you use RV's? And, where you do use SPT, why do you use that in lieu of RV's? Finally, why do you think it will become the norm?
OK, for Q1 and Q2, I consider issues like those in More On Remote Views and decide. For Q3; that's really a different topic. I recommend you start a wiki called WillHttpServersBecomeTheNorm or something and people can contribute.
Does anybody have any experience/advice on this matter?
( Topic last updated: 2001.10.25 05:00:01 AM )