A couple of questions before my vote.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Starkey [mailto:jas@...]
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 10:20 AM
To: IB-Architect@egroups.com
Subject: [IB-Architect] SuperServer vs. Classic

At 12:44 PM 5/28/00 +1000, Jan Mikkelsen wrote:

>
>All this applies to superserver, of course. Classic should just be

taken

>into the woods and shot.
>

This is the single most difficult and important question facing future
development. Among the issues:

1. SuperServer only works on threaded platforms.

Which platforms would this eliminate?

2. Security is hopeless in Classic
3. The conditionalization of the code makes ongoing maintenance
of two branches highly problematic.
4. Support both on the same machine borders on impossible
5. Given an abstract workload, neither is a clear winner.
Given a specific workload, one will generally outshine
the other.

Can you give some example workloads?

6. Asking the using at installation time which to install
time is problematic -- how could a new use possible make
an intelligent decision.

An argument can me made -- but I haven't convinced Charlie -- that
removing Classic will speed up SuperServer (algorithms are now chosen
that work well in both), and that speeding up SuperService is necessary
to kill off Classic. Chicken, egg.

Thoughts?

Jim Starkey

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failed tests, classes skipped, forgotten locker combinations.
Remember the good 'ol days
http://click.egroups.com/1/4053/4/_/830676/_/959696797/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
IB-Architect-unsubscribe@onelist.com