Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ginosko!uunet!dgis!daitc!jkrueger From: jkrueger@daitc.daitc.mil (Jon Krueger) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: Parsing Query Languages in the Client or Server Message-ID: <637@daitc.daitc.mil> Date: 25 Sep 89 19:50:41 GMT References: <6155@sybase.sybase.com> <17450@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <632@daitc.daitc.mil> <6253@sybase.sybase.com> Organization: DTIC Special Projects Office (DTIC-SPO), Alexandria VA Lines: 29 tim@binky.sybase.com (Tim Wood) writes: >Yes, but in order for the application to test against the system tables, >it has to send more query language text to the server! Could be more, could be less. It's the setup cost traded off against fewer transactions during the session. >...a lot more work will be done (compared to the same functions >performed within the server) to avoid the cost of sending the bad query >than just to send it and let the server signal any error! Why not give an example? I'll try to show how the cost could be higher either way, depending on workload. >Users expect friendly error handling from the server, regardless >of their applications; that's one of the inherent advantages and >requirements of server designs. Users talk to a user agent, not a server. Unless you're talking X Windows, of course :-) Then again, Sybase glossies have been known to use the terms "user server" and "data server"; could that be the cause of confusion here? Who's the client, anyway? :-) -- Jon -- Jonathan Krueger jkrueger@daitc.daitc.mil uunet!dgis!jkrueger Isn't it interesting that the first thing you do with your color bitmapped window system on a network is emulate an ASR33?