Re: Forms through a 64K leased line

From: Patrick De Giorgi <pdegiorgi_at_infomaniak.ch>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:45:52 +0100
Message-ID: <8vioqq$b9t$1_at_pollux.ip-plus.net>


Hi !

[Quoted] Thanks for the answers !

[Quoted] For info, all the .fmx aren't on the server ! They are on the local machine !
[Quoted] What we send through the leased line is only the requests !

That's what is strange....why a min.30 s pause between the request and the answer...?

Any idea ?

Thanks,

Patrick

"Connor McDonald" <connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message news: 3A1BA6E4.1CA9_at_yahoo.com...
> Patrick De Giorgi wrote:
> >
> > Hello !
> >
> > We are testing Forms 6 through a 64K leased line between Switzerland and
> > Belgium.
> > The version of Oracle Server is 7.3.4.
> >
> > The results are ... awful !
> > When we press enter to send the request, we measured that it sends about
> > 1,5Ko in average, then we wait about 30 s and then we received the
 answer
> > (also about 1,5Ko).
> >
> > If we do the same tests on our Lan, the results are normal. Almost no
 wait
> > between the request and the answer.
> >
> > We are using TCP/IP through 2 routers (1 Cisco 4000 and 1 Magellan).
> >
> > Is there a way to use Forms 6 like this but with a normal answer time ?
> >
> > If no, which leased line speed should we have ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Patrick
>
> For client/server then two things are very important...
>
> a) don't bring your fmx's down the leased line - have them local to the
> client (which also induces deployment headaches)
>
> b) you really need to code with WAN in mind (simple things like a select
> in a POST-query can kill you)...
>
> Alternatively look at running web-based forms which could possibly be
> more efficient - we're doing that over dial-up with reasonable results..
>
> HTH
> --
> ===========================================
> Connor McDonald
> http://www.oracledba.co.uk (mirrored at
> http://www.oradba.freeserve.co.uk)
>
> "Some days you're the pigeon, some days you're the statue"
Received on Thu Nov 23 2000 - 10:45:52 CET

Original text of this message