Re: Microsoft destroys TPC-C records!

I followed the link that you posted and now understand why this middleware publication is confused about the part that COM+ serves in the TPC-C results.

The following is a fairly large quote from the document:

"Microsoft has invested heavily in structuring its software as components that interact through remote procedure calls. The resulting infrastructure is variously called OLE (object linking and embedding), COM (component object model), DCOM (distributed COM), Microsoft ActiveX® (the Internet-centric extensions of COM), and most recently COM+. Many aspects of COM+ are in place today and more are coming soon. In particular, with Windows 2000 and Microsoft SQL Server 7.0, Microsoft delivers the following:

COM+ is a core part of Windows 2000. It allows any object to be safely and efficiently invoked. One program can invoke other programs running anywhere in the network. It combines the features of a transaction manger with the features of an object request broker (ORB) and a transaction processing monitor (TP monitor). It is the core of Microsoft's distributed object mechanisms.

Distributed transactions allow applications to do work at many Microsoft SQL Server database partitions, and other resource mangers, and automatically (transparently) get the ACID distributed transaction semantics.

OLE DB allows Microsoft SQL Server and other data integrators to access data from any data source. OLE DB interfaces are being built for almost all data sources. Most Microsoft data storage components have an OLE DB interface (for example, Exchange Server, Active Directory, Word, Excel, and so on), and OLE DB interfaces are rapidly appearing for legacy data stores like VSAM and RMS.

Data Management Objects (DMO) is a COM externalization of all the management interfaces to SQL Server. Using DMO, customers and ISVs can build tools to manage local and remote SQL Servers.

Windows 2000 also includes a reliable queuing mechanism (Message Queuing) that allows applications to issue deferred invocations (message-oriented middle-ware). These queues work for disconnected nodes as well, allowing them to submit work that will be processed when the node reconnects to the main network."

• If you look at the source code in Appendix A of the full disclosure report you will note that none of the features indicated above are even referenced, much less actually used!!!

I'm not trying to bash Microsoft, but I think misleading statements by marketing
organizations are a disservice to all of us.

Mike

Norris wrote in message <8aa53e$2874$1_at_adenine.netfront.net>...
>To see MS innovations and how SQL Server 2000 achieved world record TPC-C
performance and price/performance results:
>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/isapi/msdnlib.idc?theURL=/library/backgrnd/html/m
egasrvs.htm
>
>
>In comp.databases.sybase Nuno Souto <nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au.nospam>
wrote:
>> On 9 Mar 2000 02:00:23 GMT, Norris <jcheong_at_cooper.com.hk> wrote:
>
>>>>> > Everything any culture on the planet has today is
>>>>> > ALL built on somebody else's work.
>
>> Don't have the slightest problem with this. That's what makes progress
>> work.
>
>> PROVIDED we are talking about "building on".
>
>> Badge-engineering and term re-invention like MS does all the time
>> is what I'm against. This is not the same as "building on somebody
>> else's work". This is crap, desguised as marketing.
>
>> Many years ago, it was the norm to use tar and feathers for what MS
>> marketing does. Nowadays, the stock market hikes up the share price
>> when MS re-names something instead of "building on something"...
>
>
>
>> Cheers
>> Nuno Souto
>> nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au.nospam
>> http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/the_Den/index.html
>
>
>--
>http://www.cooper.com.hk
>http://sybooks.sybase.com/onlinebooks
Received on Sat Mar 11 2000 - 15:56:19 CST