Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!haven!vrdxhq!daitc!daitc.daitc.mil
From: jkrueger@daitc.daitc.mil (Jonathan Krueger)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Ingres User's Association Meeting
Message-ID: <512@daitc.daitc.mil>
Date: 9 May 89 17:53:53 GMT
References: <509@daitc.daitc.mil> <258@indri.primate.wisc.edu>
Sender: jkrueger@daitc.daitc.mil
Reply-To: jkrueger@daitc.daitc.mil (Jonathan Krueger)
Distribution: usa
Organization: DTIC Special Projects Office (DTIC-SPO), Alexandria VA
Lines: 24

In article <258@indri.primate.wisc.edu>, bin@primate (Paul DuBois) writes:
>[a heterogeneous network] helps a lot if your only machine or machines
>are BSD machines, doesn't it?

Of course, you're SOL.  Or, to be more precise, your options are (in
rough order of increasing cost and pain):

	1. convert one of your vaxen to Ultrix
	2. move to some other DBMS (that supports BSD)
	3. buy a non vax processor, and add it to your network
	4. add system V style shared memory to BSD Unix

Lots of tradeoffs here.  If your applications are many or large or
both, or make extensive use of RTI-specific features, or if you're
significantly more productive with RTI tools than with others running
on BSD, you might find option 3 cheaper than option 2.  Although
option 4 is easily the most expensive (figuring in support costs), it
also is the only option with profit potential, from selling it to RTI
and others, presumably.  In fact, you might call option 3 "net
retrofit" and option 4 "net profit".

-- Jon
-- 
--