Re: Database Server Vs. Application Servers - Processing Location - Regional vs. Global

Thanks for the comments/opinions from everyone.

Now it seems there is some (little I hope/think?) discussion on consolidation of all the tiers in 1 global location.

I can see where regional data centers make sense and we already have achieved this somewhat and are actively moving more toward regional data centers.

The newer discussion/idea is to have all servers in 1 location and use the 3-tier model as a first choice or use something like Citrix for the applications that do not easily fit this model (client/server).

It seems the only way this new idea will work is if just about every server is moved to the 1 global location. For example, logging into a Citrix server that loads a user's profile stored on file server from across the globe will not work. Or, having a client/server model application hitting a global location for the database from the other side of the globe will not work (I am guestimating). And, of course, 3-tier model apps would have to have all the servers in the same (or close to it) global location.

Anyway, again, any comments/opinions welcome on regional vs. global .

-- 
"Burton Peltier" <burttemp1REMOVE_THIS_at_bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:OWD0b.3482$7F2.140_at_fe05.atl2.webusenet.com...


> Just wondering what others opinions are on this subject...

>

> Within our company, there are some who think in-house developed

applications


> should be architectured such that there is no dependence on the underlying

> database server software - the database server should only do CRUD

> (create,read,update,delete) processing.

>

> This might at first seem sensible to some, I think there are way too many

> "gray areas" to say the above should be a "standard" that must be adhered

to


> or have permission to do differently. I am guessing this is some people's

> intent.

>

> Some people spend way too much effort trying to not "tie" themselves to 1

> database vendor and don't take advantage of features and functionality (in

> Oracle for our company), at a significant loss either by lost

functionality


> or performance or "writing their own way". Or, they do things like put

hints


> in the SQL to tune and are "tied" anyway.

>

> Note: I can see where a software vendor should/has to try and work this

way.


> But, this does not seem to make sense for a commercial company like ours.

>

> -- 

>

>

>