Microsoft .NET frontending IBM i

I thought I would change the subject of the email since we have split from OT.

Concerning SQL server, yes, many times it will start out that they
will use tables on DB2, but then they realize that their tools don't
work as seamlessly with DB2 as they do with MSSQL. And the creep of
MSSQL starts and before you know it there is a nightly push of table
data from one DB to another.

In fact IBM has always proposed a 2 iSeries scenario when going to the web

I would guess that is from the Websphere App Server folks - yes, I
could see why they would do two servers - they are from the same line
of thinking as the Microsoft camp. You only need two servers if your
High Availability requirements mandate it. Otherwise IBM is just
looking to get more money in their pocket.

You can also use Apache to host .Net just as easily as PHP, JSP, etc.

Yes, but not on IBMi unfortunately, unless you want to go the route of
Mono - but I don't know if that is a place I want to go.

You can also use and take advantage of CGIDEV2/IWS and I imagine RPG-XML services from ASP.Net so really all the service communications can be done via ASP.Net or by calling into the i.

Agreed. But why not just keep all that processing on IBM i with RPG
and NOT have to double many of the things I originally mentioned.
Would you agree that having .NET (and corresponding servers) AND RPG
(and corresponding servers) is more complex than just having one or
the other? That is the point I am trying to make - but a lot of
people just dismiss that as "the cost of doing business" and don't
give it ample consideration.

ASP.Net scales probably just as well as the other methods you guys have been throwing about. However I haven't done any millisecond thread clocking :-)

Of course that would all be entirely relative. Sure I could have 30
VMWare instances to facilitate the same processing power of a larger
IBM i, but why would I want to? In my mind there is a blatant scaling
issue when you can't scale by adding processing power to a single OS
instance and instead need to spread it across many OSes. Smells like
that platform wasn't ever really meant for what it was built for and
it is now just a hyped band-aid process called VMWare. FWIW, you
don't create an IBM i LPAR for the same reasons you create a Windows
VMWare, so I think your comparison is a bit unbalanced.

By disadvocating (Is that a word :-) ) Windows you're really setting people up to try and live in a bubble that no longer exists, which is the iSeries all by itself.

So are you saying you can't do an entire, and modern looking, business
application on IBM i using only RPG and CGI? Note I haven't started
talking about email servers and the like (which IBM i is terrible at
btw, unfortunately).

Interesting enough EXTJS works just as well and simply with RPG, PHP, JSP and ASP.Net. Keep evangelizing that because EXTJS is a cool framework.

Absolutely true! (glad we agree on something) What's even better is
that in many cases you can go down to a more raw form of
ASP.NET/PHP/JSP and not include all the extra layers and still get
excellent looking code that is easy enough to maintain. For example,
this program could have been written in any *single* server side
language just as easy:
http://red.rpg-xml.com/oru11/dspf/custmaint.html

I guess in the end what I disagree with is that many think you NEED
Microsoft on the front end to produce nice looking modern applications
in a timely manner for IBM i/RPG shops, and that simply isn't true.

Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com
http://mowyourlawn.com/blog/



On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Richard Schoen <richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I would advocate training existing staff.

SQL Server and a web server can live nicely on the same machine.  However for iSeries shops, there's no reason for SQL Server if all the data is in DB2.

The Windows machine can live inside the firewall just like the iSeries and expose ports as needed. In fact IBM has always proposed a 2 iSeries scenario when going to the web, so the 2 box scenario doesn't necessarily go away with iSeries unless your LPAR (Vmwareize)

You can also use Apache to host .Net just as easily as PHP, JSP, etc.

You can also use and take advantage of CGIDEV2/IWS and I imagine RPG-XML services from ASP.Net so really all the service communications can be done via ASP.Net or by calling into the i.

I've found that Client Access/400 or our .Netified version of JT400 works pretty well as the driver of choice. Seems a simple choice.

Most ASP.Net apps only take a few megs of disk on the IIS-Apache box so the machine setup is not very complicated.

A VMware is just an LPAR in sheeps clothing :-)

ASP.Net scales probably just as well as the other methods you guys have been throwing about.  However I haven't done any millisecond thread clocking :-)

More and more of our customers are using at least 1 or more Windows appliances to front end the iSeries, so I think the Modern iSeries shop usually already have a combination of Windows and iSeries and this trend will continue as will VMware adoption.

By disadvocating (Is that a word :-) )  Windows you're really setting people up to try and live in a bubble that no longer exists, which is the iSeries all by itself.

Interesting enough EXTJS works just as well and simply with RPG, PHP, JSP  and ASP.Net.  Keep evangelizing that because EXTJS is a cool framework.

Just a few counterpoints to the anti .Net for iSeries sentiment.  Have to try to keep things balanced :-)

Regards,
Richard Schoen
RJS Software Systems Inc.
Where Information Meets Innovation
Document Management, Workflow, Report Delivery, Forms and Business Intelligence
Email: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web Site: http://www.rjssoftware.com
Tel: (952) 736-5800
Fax: (952) 736-5801
Toll Free: (888) RJSSOFT
------------------------------

message: 6
date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:42:56 -0500
from: Aaron Bartell <aaronbartell@xxxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: [WEB400] Which scales better? J2EE, PHP, or CGIDEV2?

Aaron, do you really find ASP.Net that complicated ? :-)

The language/syntax itself?  I haven't touched it in awhile.  I am
more talking about a fairly common approach to "modernization" that I
see in IBMi shops which is generally as follows:

- Hire a .NET developer or train existing staff

- Setup an initial/new Windows server to sit outside the firewall, and
maintain that machine with patches.

- Setup IIS on that machine and maintain it with patches.

- Setup a separate Windows server to host MSSQL and maintain machine
with patches.

- Work through many iterations of determining the best way to
communicate with the IBMi/DB2/RPG.  Usually a mix is decided on.

- Setup ODBC for SQL to DB2 and SQL to RPG communication or spend time
researching what other type of DB connection should be made (what's
the latest and greatest this year?)

- Setup web services on IBM i using CGIDEV2/RPG-XML Suite/IWS

- Setup Apache or IWS (Websphere) to facilitate previous point and
maintain with patches.

At this point you have tripled your servers (2 windows, 1 IBM i),
double or tripled your development staff, double or tripled your
maintenance of machines, have extra licensing to be concerned about,
have two sets of knowledge to maintain (Microsoft and IBMi) and send
people to conferences for, etc.

Will many shops get a solution working with Microsoft front-ending
IBMi?  Yes.  Will they be paying much more in the long run - most
definitely.  Will they have troubles maintaining a large solution when
fixes/features need to go out?  Without a doubt.  Will they move
slower than their competitors in the long run because their
"modernization" solution is too complex?  Yes.

I look forward to seeing you at the next QUSER meeting
(http://www.quser.org/) by Minneapolis where I will be speaking about
a simpler stack (i.e. OpenRPGUI + ExtJS).[grin]  The stack I am going
to be teaching on isn't perfect, but in the long run it is a heck of a
lot less complex than significant adoption of Microsoft front ending
IBMi.

Microsoft is brilliant at making at making smaller projects simple.
But then you need to grow the project and everything just keeps
getting bigger and more complex vs. simply scaling well.  Before you
know it you have hired somebody just to keep track of VMWare
instances.

Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com
http://mowyourlawn.com/blog/