|Subject||Re: RFC: The Server client (about Gateways...)|
> > And if this mega-provider is ever implemented, what will be aIt certainly is, and those that are too lazy to study history are
> > reason of using other providers directly? Why not pass all queries
> > through it?
> That a possibility.
bound to repeat its mistakes.
It would be good to study the Oracle experience and the Ingres
experience. Have a look at, for instance:
for an example of Jim's mega-provider, and at for instance:
for an example of going the rse route.
At one point in time, the Ingres folks were building Star as a
separate project. Then they belatedly figured out that Star actually
contained >80% of the code of a regular Ingres instance and they
reverted to building it from the same code base. A bit like we build
Classic and Super from a single code base.
If one thinks it through, it soon becomes apparent that "building a
mega-provider" and "solving it at the rse level" actually results in
much the same code design.
So the whole debate around Jim's argument simplifies to:
- which presentation to the user is easier to understand
- is calling back into the provider chain from a regular server (using
all the proper interfaces) 'breaking the architecture' (as compared to
calling back into the provider chain from a special mega-provider build)?
BTW, where did the "quadruple in complexity" insight come from? Do you
have any references for that insight?