Subject Re: [IB-Architect] Classic vs SuperServer was IB/FB Lock manager failures
Author Paul Schmidt
On 19 Sep 2002 at 14:14, Jim Starkey wrote:

> At 01:46 PM 9/19/02 -0400, Paul Schmidt wrote:
> >
> >> It isn't necessary to do a fancy tree walk to find almost identical
> >> statements. Do a string compare (after a hash lookup) for
> >> absolutely identical. Keep a list of referenced tables with each
> >> compiled statement to re-validate privileges and allow cheap
> >> invalidation after a meta-data tweak. But the payback is limited
> >> unless the cache can be shared over many attachments. (And, yes,
> >> Netfrastructure has this optimization.)
> >
> >I wonder though if nearly identical, really are identical, for
> >example the
> following two
> >are actually identical.
> >
> >
> >Now you might gain a lot by doing a substitution, where the above
> >both get
> stored
> >and compared as:
> >
> >
> In Netfrastructure I don't bother to cache a compiled statement
> unless it contains at least on "?", which sorts out DDL quite
> nicely. It's also a simple rule for developers to understand
> and remember. The data aware elements of template language
> also understand and exploit it.

That makes sense....

> >>
> >> In Linux threads are implemented as separate processes sharing a
> >> single virtual address space. They definitely get scheduled on
> >> different processors. If you think writing fine granuality code is
> >> hard, making it scream on a multi-processor is a gas.
> >>
> >
> >So on Linux, thread or process is really the same difference, but on
> Windows which
> >benefits more with threads, threads are wierdly complicated..... I
> >tried
> writing a
> >multi-threaded Windows app, but it ended up effectively one thread,
> because #@$!^
> >Win9x can't figure out how to answer a modem when it rings....
> >
> Not really. The thread semantics are remarkably similar. The
> difference is that the NT kernel understands threads and thread
> synchronization while the Linux kernel does not.
> I'm sure many here will disagreement with me, but I find NT
> a vastly superior development platform while Linux, even with
> a performance penalty, makes a better deployment platform.
> Virtually all Netfrastructure applications are developed on
> Win32 and deployed on Linux.

Actually I like Linux for development, in that I like to abandon running applications,
right now I have email open, MSVC (I am running Windows, if I knew it would run
under Wine, that would not be the case), Windows Media player, Lotus Word Pro
(It's an IBM), IBOConsole, and the app I am working on. So the multiple desktops a
la KDE make sense to me, in that you can have different types of apps on different

Paul Schmidt, President
Tricat Technologies