|Subject||RE: [IB-Architect] Pros and cons...|
> From: "Markus Kemper" <mkemper@...>Hi,
> > I certainly think that if you could combine the 'best' bits of bothIn my opinion, if you can get the 'pros' of both in one version, that is
> > architectures into one version, that would be the way to go.
> I think (others may confirm or deny) that this is what
> we are trying to answer. Can we accomplish this or does
> the Classic need to continue on.
what should be done. That should suit 99% of people, the other 1% can 'roll
their own' version.
[Killing a Client Process]
> > In production, it is very useful not only for those badI tend to stick with the Linux version, so I am not sure. 'Idle' client
> > queries you have missed :-), but for 'users' who disconnect
> > badly (using the on/off switch).
> If using TCP, this is already implemented (as of v5.6 maybe
> v5.5 -- I forget -- Charlie??) in SuperServer.
connections seamed to disconnect OK, it was the clients that were in the
middle of doing something big or long when they disconnected that caused the
> The CrystalYes the OLAP side of Interbase is probably its weakest feature, but its OLTP
> reports / adhoc query issue is a killer. I think that improving
> our join performance could likely lessen the impact of many
> of those CR generated queries.
blows the competitors products into the ground. The problem is, if you are
storing data, somebody always wants to 'do something in Access' with it etc.
I personally don't thing this side of things should be top of priorities
list, but any improvement would be great.
> > You could implement some extra triggers for 'users', AfterLogin,Yes they do, but not everybody is going to be using Borland tools, there are
> > BeforeLogout, AfterCrash, AfterTimeOut.
> I'm not sure that these would solve this problem but they are
> interesting to think about. Many things could be handled
> already with the Events in IBX/IBO.
millions of (love them or hate them) Visual Basic developers out there that
could be using IB, not forgetting all the Linux/Perl/Python etc. people. I
am currently developing an application that has three different flavours of
client 'app' (Delphi, Java and IBPerl), and I need to write different code
for each one, where I would of preferred to do it as one stored procedure.
> > I did not think Superserver scaled at all on SMP machines, II meant NT, sorry. There must be a way round it, dare I say it, but M$SQL
> > thought it took a performance hit?
> I suspect that if a performance hit is seen, its likely
> due to the OS' processor scheduling mechanisms. I've only
> heard troubles with NT and SMP with IB SS, thus IB_Affinity
Server nearly doubles its performance (to not quite as slow :-) ),with an