Re: CFINT: I understand it now...

From: Joe Pluta <joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com>
> > ===> no argument, really. I was just not convinced by your very
> > strong statement that C/S is 'far MORE' efficient. C/S is a 'far
> > BETTER' approach for many other reasons.
>
> I think I've restated my position adequately... C/S and monolithic
> applications are "roughly equivalent", but servers have opportunities for
> performance enhancements not available to monolithic techniques.

you COULD do similar things (caching of small tables) in a monolithic
program.

> And, as
> you pointed out, there are other benefits, not the least of which is
> prograsmmer productivity.  Remove the word "far" from my original
statement,
> and we can quit quibbling.
>

remove MORE (especially CAPITALIZED) as well and we agree. The benefits are
not efficiency, but a host of other things, and they are real. One of the
most important is
that it makes it a lot easier to get off the platform.  :-)