On 22 Oct 2001, at 13:05, Artur Anjos wrote:

> Paul:
>
> I agree with you when you say that "most database transmissions are
> less then 1K in size, without a lot of repeating..."
>
> We really don't need the lack of compression there. We did not notice
> that we are working in a slow connection also. But if you are building
> a report, for example, and fetching a lot of data from the server on
> a slow connection, compression will be nice. What I was saying that
> will be nice if FB could check when or not to compress the data,
> according to the length of data to be fetch. That' I'm shure that will
> make a difference in Slow connections.
>
> I was speaking about encripting at the same time, because if the
> driver was changed to use compression, it will be easy also to add
> encription. I know that VPN software can do the job, but...
>
> Well, I was just dreaming...
>

I was just saying that it might make more sense to use a
compressing and encrypting router, between sites, where it is
possible to do both functions at the network level rather then the
DB level.

Paul
Paul Schmidt
Tricat Technologies
paul@...
www.tricattechnologies.com