Subject RE: [IB-Architect] Pros and cons...
Author Phil Shrimpton
> From: "Markus Kemper" <mkemper@...>


> I'll take a whack at this one. We've been discussing this
> issue internally quite a bit. Classic does have some nice
> benefits over SuperServer at this stage in the game. I
> think that most if not all of those benefits could be
> implemented into the SuperServer engine.

I certainly think that if you could combine the 'best' bits of both
architectures into one version, that would be the way to go.

> > I like the ability to be able to kill a client in Linux
> May I ask when and why you find this a benefit.

In development it is a must. In production, it is very useful not only for
those bad queries you have missed :-), but for 'users' who disconnect badly
(using the on/off switch). I have been to customers sites where there has
been 10 processes and only one connected user. Some applications I provide
'views' so users can use Crystal reports etc. to do their own 'ad-hoc'
reports, and it only takes a really bad piece of SQL to bring everything to
a stand still for hours. For all the above situations, I can sort out
without stopping the server on the classic architecture, but using
superserver normally requires a reboot.

> Some of the other benefits of Classic to date are:
> b) A client crash does not bring everyone down.
> So I'd rather see us
> continue to make SuperServer more stable vs. going the
> route of trying to react to a crash and continue work
> the other clients. It would be nice if the engine
> could be more intelligent about reporting a crash so
> that it was easier to identify and reproduce and then
> fix.

You could implement some extra triggers for 'users', AfterLogin,
BeforeLogout, AfterCrash, AfterTimeOut. That way you could use events that
an external program could either kill the process, send an email to support,
phone somebody's mobile etc. etc.

> c) SMP support. Classic scales better by design at this
> point. This could be implemented in the SuperServer,
> it just takes time.

I did not think Superserver scaled at all on SMP machines, I thought it took
a performance hit?