Re: How to talk to LISTENER

Agron wrote:

> Well anyway, I'll do as you say with tnsping and network sniffer. But do
> you have to be so picky about how we call the servers?

If you want to play in the sandbox, you might as well get used to talking like the other kids. Please use the correct terminology - it's a sign of respect for those who work in the field. Not doing so irritates me (possibly others) to no end, and if it persists after a polite discussion about it I generally walk away.

> When you say sql server, every one knows that your talking about a

> server that gives you data in exchange for sql expressions. Now all

Actually, 75+% of the time when someone says to me "I use SQL" they mean "I use MS SQL Server". Likely they also mean "... and I really don't understand why others do thing different from Microsoft."

And the term sql server, not used in contexzt of MS SQL Server, is almost never hear and will likely not be understood.

> servers, in computer terminology, serve data. Be it a file server, web
> server, ICQ server, real media server.

We would use the term "Data Server" or "Database Server", not "SQL Server" the thing soes not serve up SQL, it responds to an API called SQL. These systems server data, not SQL ... just as a file server servers up files, not smbs (and a print server servers up prints not postscripts.) (And some would take exception to "web server' - for professionals, it's an HTTP server.)

> And I don't agree to call only MS SQL Server a 'SQL server' (despite its
> name) and all other RDBMS by their individual product name.
> MS SQL Server is not the only SQL Server. And hence the component I am
> working on.

You don't have to agreee. But don't expect a straight forward response if you don't use the common terminology.

> In the latest MS Platform SDK, MS has added an API function to find
> only MICROSOFT SQL Servers. A great idea. Something we wanted for a long
> time. But I think it is incomplete. I think it should list all sql
> servers or RDBMS that can receive SQL, not those RDBMS that receive
> specialized DBF type of commands.

I doubt it will ever happen. The communication media are significantly different and the respective companies will probably atempt to make even more laywers rich if they tried. Received on Wed Apr 23 2003 - 14:23:47 CDT