| Subject | Re: Safe to run all workstations from a central MyClientApp.exe & fbclient.dll ? |
|---|---|
| Author | Adam |
| Post date | 2007-04-16T23:20:45Z |
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "mlq97" <mlq@...> wrote:
We previously delivered client-server installations in this manner. We
did encounter some problems with slow networks. Yes the contract
stated they needed 100Mbps or better, but sometimes they were and just
auto-negotiated slower.
Our application is not a monolith exe file, but rather a relatively
modest exe file with around 100 bpls (like dlls) linked as required at
runtime. Consequently, initial launch time was not too bad, but there
were annoying delays whenever you loaded a different part of the
application.
The nature of the usage of our application meant that it is loaded
then exited many times per day. I suppose if it was a single
executable loaded once per day, it would be fine.
We now use a loader application. Our client install consists of a
single light-weight executable and an ini file. The ini file simply
tells the loader where the master executables are located. The loader
compares the file date of each of the server files with the file date
of the client files, and any file that has a different date (or does
not exist) is downloaded. An upgrade consists of dumping the new files
in the master folder. When nothing changes, it takes under a second to
load. Otherwise launch times are network dependent.
Adam
>Nothing from an integrity point of view.
> I initially had a separate MyClientApp.exe & fbclient.dll installed on
> each workstation on our network. Although this arrangement minimises
> network traffic when starting the app, it is a real pain to have to
> copy updated versions of MyClientApp.exe to each workstation each time
> I create enhancements (which is frequently).
>
> So I have shared a directory on the server and placed one copy of
> MyClientApp.exe & fbClient.dll there for all the workstations to run.
> This way I only need to update the MyClientApp.exe once.
>
> Other than more network traffic and slightly slower App startup time,
> is there any particular risk to doing this from a data integrity point
> of view?
We previously delivered client-server installations in this manner. We
did encounter some problems with slow networks. Yes the contract
stated they needed 100Mbps or better, but sometimes they were and just
auto-negotiated slower.
Our application is not a monolith exe file, but rather a relatively
modest exe file with around 100 bpls (like dlls) linked as required at
runtime. Consequently, initial launch time was not too bad, but there
were annoying delays whenever you loaded a different part of the
application.
The nature of the usage of our application meant that it is loaded
then exited many times per day. I suppose if it was a single
executable loaded once per day, it would be fine.
We now use a loader application. Our client install consists of a
single light-weight executable and an ini file. The ini file simply
tells the loader where the master executables are located. The loader
compares the file date of each of the server files with the file date
of the client files, and any file that has a different date (or does
not exist) is downloaded. An upgrade consists of dumping the new files
in the master folder. When nothing changes, it takes under a second to
load. Otherwise launch times are network dependent.
Adam