|
dev
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
What's the most performant? Fat our smart client?Hi,
What's in general the most performant for a VB.NET Windows Forms (2.0) application: - a fat client (everything one the client, the server hosts only the database) - a smart client (an application on the client, that communicates with an application on the server via Webservices/Remoting/..) I would somehow think a smart client, but would just like to have the opinion of others :-) Thanks a lot in advance, Pieter Pieter,
Definitly a Fat client if your company want to spent as less money overall and wants the most efficiency from the total system. Definitly smart client, if your company is by instance a company who want to invest more millions in Big Central computer systems and a very expensive LAN's and only very few money in client systems. (This based on an application inside a LAN, if it is on the Interenet than your objectives are for me to raw). Everything on the Client does for me not mean consequently on the client, data can be retrieved from the database in very small parts. Just my thought, Cor Show quote "Pieter Coucke" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht news:ubAsA%23mfGHA.4932@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Hi, > > What's in general the most performant for a VB.NET Windows Forms (2.0) > application: > - a fat client (everything one the client, the server hosts only the > database) > - a smart client (an application on the client, that communicates with an > application on the server via Webservices/Remoting/..) > > I would somehow think a smart client, but would just like to have the > opinion of others :-) > > Thanks a lot in advance, > > Pieter > Pieter Coucke wrote:
Show quote > Hi, It is much easier for unexperienced programmers to create a fat-client > > What's in general the most performant for a VB.NET Windows Forms (2.0) > application: > - a fat client (everything one the client, the server hosts only the > database) > - a smart client (an application on the client, that communicates with an > application on the server via Webservices/Remoting/..) > > I would somehow think a smart client, but would just like to have the > opinion of others :-) > > Thanks a lot in advance, > > Pieter > > reading data directly from the database. It will probably be also more performant. But if you have a team with experience in web services/xml/http/web servers you can create a smart client application. It could be more scalable than a fat-client application and much easier to maintain (provided that the client app does not change frequently). Why not use web browser as a smart client? I do such systems in my company and we have developed quite a powerful framework for browser-based smart client systems. rg "Pieter Coucke" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> wrote in I would go with a Smart client because it buys you the most flexibility.news:ubAsA#mfGHA.4932@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl: > - a smart client (an application on the client, that communicates with > an application on the server via Webservices/Remoting/..) > > I would somehow think a smart client, but would just like to have the > opinion of others :-) Also, a smart client does not involve much more effort than a standard fat client. I have to agree with Cor, with the proviso that you should enable
flexibility in your fat client (abstract any data access methods). This is easy with the project I am working on. I have an abstract DataConnection class with all of the methods I need in order to manipulate the data store. I use a class factory to create whatever connection type I need, derived from DataConnection, including SQL Server, Oracle, DB2, MySQL and SOAP. It's just the same as writing a "middleware" library, except you contain the library within your fat client, rather than outside it. Show quote "Pieter Coucke" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:ubAsA%23mfGHA.4932@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Hi, > > What's in general the most performant for a VB.NET Windows Forms (2.0) > application: > - a fat client (everything one the client, the server hosts only the > database) > - a smart client (an application on the client, that communicates with an > application on the server via Webservices/Remoting/..) > > I would somehow think a smart client, but would just like to have the > opinion of others :-) > > Thanks a lot in advance, > > Pieter > The definitions for "fat" or "smart" clients are so vague, that either
definition would fit either of the implementations you describe... There are several factors that you should consider when deciding on the architecture: :: Security requirements - With a webservice type architecture you have one more layer between the user and the database that the user (or someone impersonating a user) can not tamper with. :: Performance requirements - If the connection speed is slow you can use the server logic in a webserver type architecture to minimize traffic.:: Network limitations - A webservice solution can be used without reconfiguring any firewalls or routers on the way.:: Simplicity - A direct database connection is more straightforward layer that enables you to do changes in the database architecture solution. :: Data isolation - A webservice type architecture gives you another without the need to deply a new version of the client program. ...and probably some more that I can't think of right now. Pieter Coucke wrote: Show quote > Hi, > > What's in general the most performant for a VB.NET Windows Forms (2.0) > application: > - a fat client (everything one the client, the server hosts only the > database) > - a smart client (an application on the client, that communicates with an > application on the server via Webservices/Remoting/..) > > I would somehow think a smart client, but would just like to have the > opinion of others :-) > > Thanks a lot in advance, > > Pieter > > screw .net and screw thin clients.
i woudl reccomend Access Data Projects. simple data entry apps. it works allright against sql 2005; but you've got to use SSMS to write objects once you get your data in SQL 2005. and it's fast as snot. Concerning network limitations: Which consumes the most network bandwith?
- webservices - remoting or - a fat client (without application server)? Pieter,
Without any further information, than it is in equal situation for sure a webservice which has the less performance, just because it uses XML which needs the tags and is non compressed. You would however be a fool if you would use that as critera. There are given in this thread some better criteria to decide. Cor Show quote "Pieter" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht news:eKo1sb0fGHA.4080@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Concerning network limitations: Which consumes the most network bandwith? > - webservices > - remoting > or > - a fat client (without application server)? > "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> wrote in message I do agree, but I was talking some days ago with a company that used this as news:%23d%23pBu0fGHA.4776@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > You would however be a fool if you would use that as critera. an argument :-) So I wanted to know if somebody had an exact impact of it on the bandwith :-) Pieter wrote:
> Concerning network limitations: Which consumes the most network bandwith? Webservices uses more bandwith than remoting, at least if they are used > - webservices > - remoting the same way. (Webservices is a lot easier to build and use, though.) > or How that performs compared to the other depends a lot on how much data > - a fat client (without application server)? you have to access to do the business logics. A huge question and not one easily answered. I guess in a nutshell it all
depends on what your requirement actually is, and what skilled resources you can call on, your security needs, your data access restrictions. I would never chose a technology platform and deployment approach because it might be faster-it could be a wholly innapropriate choice in the end. For example - If its an application for 10 desktop users thats heavily into working with the local registry wheree performance is absolutely paramount then a smart clients unlikely to cut it, however if you have thousands of distributed users on an extranet type scenario using different access devices then smart client may be appropriate, but then maybe a well defined web app would do just as well. That said, poorly specced hardware will cause any web server setup to grind to nothing, so your performance dies with it. As an architect, you should consier all of these things and also consider the cost of future proofing the application - whats the likely direction of the app - if its heading for smart phones and the web then theres not a lot of point in building a fat client that will only sit well on a pc as you'll have to do it all later. -- Show quoteRegards John Timney Microsoft MVP "Pieter Coucke" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:ubAsA%23mfGHA.4932@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Hi, > > What's in general the most performant for a VB.NET Windows Forms (2.0) > application: > - a fat client (everything one the client, the server hosts only the > database) > - a smart client (an application on the client, that communicates with an > application on the server via Webservices/Remoting/..) > > I would somehow think a smart client, but would just like to have the > opinion of others :-) > > Thanks a lot in advance, > > Pieter > |
|||||||||||||||||||||||