RevConference - Client Server vs Stateless

[Doug Lerner]

If the server has the ability to communicate with a Rev thin client with
server push to the sockets, wouldn't direct access would be more dynamic?
For one thing, you avoid repetitive authentications.

And if the server has scalable feature - like Web Crossing - you are taking
advantage of huge server-side architecture benefits.

doug


On 1/13/04 9:09 AM, "HyperChris at aol.com" <HyperChris at aol.com> wrote:

> In Jerry Daniels presentation on thin clients he stated a strong preference
> against using the client-server model, which I took to be Rev talking to the
> database directly, in favor of what he called a stateless model in which rev
> made http calls to the Apache/MySQL/PHP setup.
> 
> The obvious question I have is why ? Do the stateful operation of direct
> database calls create a reliability problem? (The little voice in my head says
> I
> am missing something here!)
> 
> Also, it occurs to me that the Rev engine could replace PHP and allow one to
> simplify that aspect of it a little bit. I say a little bit because one would
> still have to right scripts for the Rev engine that translate ones tags into
> database calls. Has anyone taken this route and care to share its
> effectiveness
> ?
> 
> Thanks.
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution