RE: Fast400 Value to iSeries community is less than zero

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Richter
>
> The only tradeoff I see that justifies the client/server model is the low
> horsepower of a CFINT system.

Just to name a few:

1. The ability to have services on different machines.
2. The ability to have services on different platforms.
3. The ability to have different user interfaces for the same business
logic.
4. The ability to offload work to dedicated subprocessors.
5. The ability to dynamically assign more resources to critical work.
6. The ability to have databases that span machines, platforms and media.
7. The ability to incorporate new technology that you haven't even thought
of yet.
8. The ability to broadcast transactions to multiple environments.
9. The ability to bridge multiple systems seamlessly.

All of this is completely transparent to the application in a distributed
programming environment.  The message broker can route transactions wherever
they need to go.  Work units can be spread among multiple processors as
appropriate.  This is nice to allow load balancing that favors data entry
during the day and batch processing at night.  Jobs can be sent to other
machines.  This is great when a task begins to consume too many resources on
your host (for example, converting spooled files to PDF documents - you can
easily offload this process).  A transaction can be broadcast to multiple
sites (this is especially important when merging multiple systems).  The
broker can translate a request from one format to another when it recognizes
that the data needs to come from an application other than the originating
application.

A client/server, or distributed, architecture provides the flexibility that
allows systems to interact seamlessly without writing all kinds of
system-specific integration code.

Joe Pluta
www.plutabrothers.com