RevConference - Client Server vs Stateless

[Jerry Daniels]

Doug,

Sorry, for the late response on this, but, here it is...

When you say "server" to what are you referring? Web server? 
Application Server? Database server?

I agree that scaled servers represent a huge performance advantage and 
WEB/APP servers are the cheapest and simplest tier to scale. I have 
built systems with over 25,000 users (with peaks of 4-5,000 concurrent 
users) and only had ONE database server (with mirroring, etc.). That 
system DID have 13 web/app servers, though. Relatively inexpensive 
boxes, I might add.

In most N-Tier systems I've used, the web servers are the only database 
users and the ones requiring authentication. The clients are not 
database users, but users of web services. This also seems that way 
most enterprise information systems are going these days. I feel like 
I've found a profitable way to fit the building of Rev thin clients 
into that mix. I just don't see that many new client-server projects 
being started in IT departments around here.

Another question: why would a server "push" to the client? Don't 
servers usually reply to a request from a client? Maybe I'm missing 
something here.

Best,

Jerry

On Jan 12, 2004, at 6:19 PM, Doug Lerner wrote:

> 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:
>