Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!odi!dlw From: dlw@odi.com (Dan Weinreb) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: Client/Server processes and implementations Message-ID: <1989Nov29.224606.19358@odi.com> Date: 29 Nov 89 22:46:06 GMT References: <713@xyzzy.UUCP> Reply-To: dlw@odi.com Distribution: usa Organization: Object Design, Inc. Lines: 37 In-Reply-To: harrism@aquila.rtp.dg.com's message of 28 Nov 89 13:19:13 GMT In article <713@xyzzy.UUCP> harrism@aquila.rtp.dg.com (Mike Harris) writes: The locking and synchronizations issues (implementation thereof) aren't trivial. I wrote the kernel portion of our Server Manager product and these issues were the most difficult - especially when performance is required. Timing problems are murder. Please understand that I'm not slamming the Sybase product. I just believe that an MP style architecture is required for larger, faster machines, for cpu utilization, for I/O bandwidth, and for tuning. Excuse me, but with all these postings, I'm not clear about whether we're all using the same terminology. When you say "an MP style architecture is required", I'm not sure precisely what you mean. Is it an MP style architecture if you have a LWP package running inside a single O/S process, and the LWP is the conventional kind such as SunOS currently provides, and that you can easily write yourself? Is it an MP style architecture if you have a LWP package running inside a single O/S process, and the LWP is the kind provided by the operating system that is capable of running many of the LWPs at the same time on distinct processors of a coarse-grained multiprocessor system, such as Sequent provides? Or do you mean an architecture in which there are many different operating system processes, each with its own address space, running on the same database? Or do you mean it is required that many different machines (not a multiprocessor computer but many machines, connected by a LAN or something like that) be able to all directly acts as servers for the same database? I apologize if I'm sounding pedantic, but I am honestly having trouble following some of the interesting ideas on comp.databases because industry terminology simply isn't uniformly standard. Thanks. Dan Weinreb Object Design dlw@odi.com Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com