Even if I run the server on one machine and the DB on another, if the
system is down, crashes, for update or patch, the system is off line. I
understand what you mean, I could have multiple servers to handle bringing
one down, but that is just extra expense, although it is probably just the
model.
But if the as/400 is the server, it rarely needs patched, or crashes,
unlike windows (though they are getting better about crashing). As you
said that's just the model. Both have their advantages, but just because
its the chosen model doesn't make it right. Was it designed to act like
that, (like the McLaren was not designed to transport large items), or is
it just what people have to do to make it work.
From:
"Walden H. Leverich" <WaldenL@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
"Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries" <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
08/08/2008 10:19 AM
Subject:
Re: [WEB400] What's the latest thinking of the besttwo or
threewebdevelopment languages/environ...
One the advantages of having an as/400 is that you only need one box.
True. But you need to balance that against the fact that one of the
disadvantages of having an as/400 is you only have one box. Upgrading?
Patching? Crashed? You're entire enterprise is offline. Smart?
Windows is not powerful enough to support a
database and application server on one box.
Whether you could or not (you could do some crazy things with a 64-way
machine w/2TB of memory) that's not the Windows model. Like it or not,
it's not the model. You can rant about it all you want, it's not the
model. Am I getting through? It's not the model. Complaining about the
fact that you wouldn't do it all on one machine (note I said "wouldn't"
not "couldn't") is like having a McLaren-Mercedes F1 racer and
complaining you can't use it to pick up a plant at Home Depot, it's
simply not the model!
-Walden
--
Walden H Leverich III
Tech Software
(516) 627-3800 x3051
WaldenL@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.TechSoftInc.com
Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
(Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)
midrange.com
