HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mef@Unify.com (Marvin Fenner)
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
Subject: Re: scared customers
Date: 7 Oct 92 19:15:12 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Unify Corporation (Sacramento)

In article <1992Oct5.190119.21270@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, jona@iscp.bellcore.com (Jon Alperin) writes:
] In article <1992Oct5.173444.24966@meaddata.com>, srivasm@meaddata.com (M. C. Srivas) writes:
] |> In article <DWF.92Oct5092154@hope.acl.lanl.gov>, dwf@acl.lanl.gov (David W. Forslund) writes:
] 
] |> millions of machines and many millions of users. What do you have in
] |> mind when you say:
] |> 
] |> 	"I believe the workstation world now is moving more to
] |> 	peer-peer computing in a truly distributed manner."
] |> 
] |> I find that very hard to believe.
] |> 
] |> -Srivas.
] |> 
] 
]  Whoa....It all points to the paradigm you are using. If I set out a bunch of PC's,
] and mount file systems from a UNIX host, this is C/S. But if I set up a SUN
] workstation to point to another workstations' printer, use xntpd to keep my clock in 
] sync with someone else, this is peer to peer computing. Now, if my sun is a 

Pardon this naive question, but I'm not sure I see the distinction here.
Haven't you described a) a file server, b) a print server, and c) a time
server? Am I incorrectly using the terms Client and Server (not that
anyone's ever done that ;-)).

(Note: we have a bunch of PCs using Unix workstation print queues and
clock synchronization.)

-- 
Marv Fenner           | Mine. All mine.
Unify Corporation     | Sacramento, CA
Voice: (916)928-6266  | FAX: (916)928-640[23]  | Email: mef@unify.Com 
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: nlane@well.sf.ca.us (Nathan D. Lane)
Subject: Re: Lotus Powerbook
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 05:27:21 GMT

> thought POWER was the acronym IBM used to refer to the CPU
> architecture in the RS/6000. (No, I can't remember what it stands for.)

Just in case anyone cares, Power is:

Performance Optimization With Enhanced Risc

As in the rumored "Power-PC" or "POWER-PC".  I have the first "revision"
of that machine, soon to be obsoleted by a version with 40% more power
for the same price (the IBM RS/6000 Model 220, supplanted [I would imagine]
by the 220H).

Just to make this a part of the client-server group, the application
I am developing is heavily dependent upon a network and is designed
to be scalable to "millions of users/millions of machines" or at least
nationwide here in the US.  It is designed for Title Companies and involves
the imaging of all county recorder's office documents and making them 
avialable to all title companies in a county, and even out of county/state.

-Nathan Lane
Tricon Computer Systems, Inc.
Santa Barbara, CA
nlane@well.sf.ca.us [soon to be nlane@seldon.tricon.com]

Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: martijn@htsa.aha.nl (Martijn van der Heide)
Subject: server?
Organization: Algemene Hogeschool Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 13:28:00 GMT


I think this newsgroup was initially not meant to be a newsgroup for the
serverprogram client from htsa.
But: What is it for?
I really don't know!
I hope anyone can inform me about this!
As this newsgroup exists anyway, I don't understand why this serverprogram
from htsa can NOT be discussed in it.
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Subject: Re: scared customers
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
	<1871@sousa.ltn.dec.com> <1992Oct6.124600.7281@texhrc.uucp>
	<EMERY.92Oct6134626@Dr_No.mitre.org>
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 11:18:48 GMT

In article <EMERY.92Oct6134626@Dr_No.mitre.org> emery@Dr_No.mitre.org (David Emery) writes:

   Ada 83 is a good language to model such applications.  It's easy to
   develop a 'non-distributed' application using tasks.  You can debug
   the single program (one of the real pains in developing distributed
   systems), and then replace task entry calls with calls to RPCs.

This type of capability is certainly not unique to Ada.  For example,
Sun RPC's rpcgen facility produces server and client stubs in a way
that if you want to test your program without using RPC's, you can
simply link the client and server code together, leaving out the
stubs, and everything will work.

-- 
Jonathan Kamens                                         jik@MIT.Edu
MIT Information Systems/Athena              Moderator, news.answers
    (Send correspondence related to the news.answers newsgroup
        {and ONLY correspondence related to the newsgroup}
                 to news-answers-request@MIT.Edu.)



Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: slater@mrktng.enet.dec.com (Marc Slater)
Subject: Re: clinet-server benchmarks
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 16 OCT 92 00:41:39    


Client/server performance benchmarking is:

	- great fun
	- much more complex than time shared or batch benchmarking
	- much more expensive than traditional benchmarking
	- probably won't get much easier as time goes on 

C/s performance characterization is more complex and expensive than the
more traditional computing styles (time sharing, batch).  More complex
since there are more interactions to investigate: desk top to host and
host to host (note the elegant side stepping of the client/server - 
server/client definitions:).  The more components that make up the
system, the more potential bottlenecks there are.

More expensive since the tools technology to drive c/s experiments are
more complex than ever before.  For time shared user benchmarking, a 
relatively simple remote terminal emulator could be used.  With today's 
c/s applications: mouse movements, button clicking, drag and drop, multiple
windows, multiple network stacks, and messaging formats make desk top emulation
nearly impossible.  To measure the response time at a desk top, you need
to configure and drive a desk top.  Since even the smallest servers today can 
support dozens of clients, driving a server to saturation can be a logistical 
nightmare. With high end servers, it is nigh on impossible to drive it to 
saturation with some applications, and modeling is the only hope of accurately 
sizing the server.

There are also many environments (and more coming) to deal with: X11, MS
Windows, MAC, DOS, and VTs.  Many applications span all of these environments,
and while there are many tools for each of these environments, there are no
tools that I am aware of that span all of them.  So in addition to the capital
costs of all of those desk tops, there is the cost of the software licenses for
the benchmarking tools. 

As applications spread across desk top environments, server platforms,
network operating systems, and operating systems, evaluating the 
performance of these applications across the range becomes even more 
formidable, if not impossible, task.

All together a good problem to have, and the opportunities in this space
are exciting.

Regards,


+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Marc Slater				Applications			      |
| Digital Equipment Corp (TTB1-1/E09)	 Systems			      |
| Ten Tara Blvd., Nashua, NH 03062	  Engineering			      |
| Telephone: (603) 884-6309		   Performance			      |
| FAX: (603) 884-2253                       Group			      |
| Internet: slater@mrktng.enet.dec.com	         Possibly my own opinions     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: moofie@apple.com (Steve Klingsporn)
Subject: Re: Lotus Powerbook
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:53:26 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: comp.client-server

In article <1992Oct7.184921.26543@hsr.no>, jonny@hsr.no (Jonny Rein
Eriksen) wrote:


> 
> Also I would be interested to know if Powerbook is going to support GUPTA SQL-Base
> 
> 
> If anyone can help, please followup or E-Mail at jonny@hsr.no

What is PowerBook?  PowerBook is a registered trademark of Apple
Computer, Inc.

I'm sure there are way bad legal ramifications here!!!

Just MY opinion,

Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Klingsporn                        "I have but one desire in life,
Collaborative Systems Development        to tear down the sky."
Apple Computer, Inc.
20525 Mariani Avenue, MS 35-A                           - Alberto Tomba
Cupertino, CA  95014
(408) 862-6508
Internet: moofie@apple.com

Disclaimer:  Whatever I express is that of my warped mind alone, and
in no way represents my employer.
From: Mike.Geldner@East.Sun.COM
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
Subject: Re: charter - an addition
Date: 9 Oct 1992 21:22:48 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: Mike.Geldner@East.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: y-ask-y.east.sun.com
Keywords: client-server

After having followed the "scared customers" thread, it became apparent
to me that the definition of "Client-Server" is open-ended.  I propose
that the charter be amended to include an effort to decisively define
what is meant by "Client-Server" and then to promote that definition 
among our peers.  This should lead to a clearer understanding of the
concepts and, thus, "higher-quality" discussions on topics concerned
with client-server issues.

I have seen several good definitions in this group already.  Would
somebody like to begin by consolidating them?

Thanks,
 
-mike


---
Michael H. Geldner
Area Technology Manager
Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation
Mike.Geldner@East.Sun.COM
(407)384-4639
From: ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University)
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
Subject: Re: My personal ideas on Client/Server
Date: 9 Oct 92 10:56:03 +1300
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1b0r3eINNne5@gap.caltech.edu>, toddpw@cco.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) writes:
> ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University) writes:
>
>>Apple's AppleEvent Object Model seems to me to be one step on this road, which
>
> Yes, but it's only a step. I would love to be wrong on this, but AppleEvents
> seems to be more of a kludge based on the existing Event architecture that is
> inherent in the Mac GUI. I have not been keeping current on this but as of last
> summer I was not too impressed by AppleEvents. I hope it has improved since, or
> that I did not get to see the whole story, because what I did see looked quite
> lacking when compared to OLE.

That's strange. I thought of OLE as being roughly equivalent to Publish/
Subscribe under Macintosh System 7, only without the network transparency.
That is, it allows you to embed a data object in one document, that actually
comes from another document (possibly another application). Any updates in
the original document are automatically propagated to subscribers, and the
subscriber can also invoke a "Go To Publisher" function (which relies heavily
on the AppleEvent infrastructure in order to work), which automatically brings
up the publisher document (perhaps launching the corresponding application if
it isn't already running), and autoscrolls it to the portion that was
published.

AppleEvents do more than this. The Object Model, in particular, gives a way
to reference objects like windows, documents and files, and parts thereof,
eg "find all the bold text on pages 2 to 4 of document Fred and make it blue".
This allows applications to call on the services of other applications, eg a
word processing program doesn't need to provide drawing tools to manipulate
graphics, it can make use of the services of an existing drawing program.

AppleEvents aren't a scripting language per se, but they do provide the
basis on which you can build a scripting system to coordinate tasks involving
a whole bunch of applications working in concert.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro                       fone: +64-7-856-2889
Computer Services Dept                     fax: +64-7-838-4066
University of Waikato            electric mail: ldo@waikato.ac.nz
Hamilton, New Zealand    37^ 47' 26" S, 175^ 19' 7" E, GMT+13:00
Actually, of course, they were right within the circumstances of their study,
but most of us can't afford such expensive circumstances.
				       -- Bruce Tognazzini, "Tog on Interface"
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: martijn@htsa.aha.nl (Martijn van der Heide)
Subject: Re: Client-Server
Organization: Algemene Hogeschool Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 12:11:17 GMT

In article <1992Oct16.114242.21082@htsa.aha.nl> jeroenkw@htsa.aha.nl (Jeroen Kwast) writes:
>In article <1bka4kINNc0h@ef2007.efhd.ford.com> wwm@ef5003.efhd.ford.com (Bill Meahan) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct15.142133.7998@htsa.aha.nl> benc@htsa.aha.nl (Ben Castricum) writes:
>>>In article <1992Oct15.111641.29400@htsa.aha.nl> you write:
>>>>
>>>>Hello out there,
>>>>
>>>>We were supprised to hear that a newsgroup exists about our great client-server.
>>>>
>>>>If you know it please give us some comments!
>>
>>For those of us who tuned in late? care to tell us what this is all
>>about?
>>
>>WHOSE client-server?
>
>Well, mine ...
>>
>>From where?
>
>From the htsa DADS group.
>>
>>For what platforms?
>>
>>With what networks?
>
>Any UNIX related network.
>>
>>?????????????????????????????????????????????????????
>>
>>
>>(Methinks this group is about client-server in general, not somebody's
>>specific "product")
>>
>Offcourse, but I thought I would begin with my product to launch a discussion.
>>
>Well client server is the first program that enables you to connect to
>multiple sites but using 1 terminal for I/O.
>It is used (at least for now) to connect people working in the same
>company but in different countries. They can use a specific application
>and respond(change) to I/O from others directly but the final respons
>remains by source.
>>
>If you're interrested, let's us know and give some details about your
>company.
>						Dir. Jeroen. J
[signature deleted]

Well, as we are speaking of a server of this particular kind, I think our
company can use it. Oh wait, I just discovered:
1. We belong to the same company;
2. I am one of the authors myself;
3. I can also direct you by talking to you in person, as you are sitting
   right in front of me!

So, all in all, I think this (expensive?!) message was sent for NO REASON
AT ALL!!!!! What a waist of money, isn't it! (But it sure is fun!)

--
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Even Magicus M. and Vulture the dragonslayer don't understand why you exist  |
+------+----------------------------------------------------------------+------+
|%^^^^%|    But ... keep smiling when the rain blasts your head ...     |%^^^^%|
| O  O +----------------------------------------------------------------+ O  O |
|      |             Keep trying this wonderfull machine!!!             |      |
| (**) +----------------------------------------------------------------+ (**) |
+------+                                                                +------+
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: IMAGING.CLUB@OFFICE.WANG.COM ("Imaging Club")
Subject: Networld show in Dallas runs October 13, 14 and 15
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: 07 Oct 92 18:24:45 EST

The Networld 92 exhibition in Dallas is taking place on October
13 (10:00-5:00), 14 (10:00-5:00) and 15 (10:00-4:00) at
the Dallas Convention Center.

Michael.Willett@OFFICE.Wang.com
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Subject: Re: scared customers
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
	<LOWRY.92Oct6101439@rotor.watson.ibm.com>
	<1992Oct06.150941.89845@watson.ibm.com>
	<LOWRY.92Oct6120218@rotor.watson.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 11:26:44 GMT

In article <LOWRY.92Oct6120218@rotor.watson.ibm.com> lowry@watson.ibm.com (Andy Lowry) writes:

   And
   the problem with the typical software technology you see to support
   C-S style computing is that it's typically made fairly easy (but not
   nearly easy enough) to play the role of client, but much more
   difficult to play the role of server.  There's an asymmetry in the
   model, and there's an asymmetry in the implementations.  There appears
   to be a view (I've heard it enunciated several times) that servers are
   rare, and therefore it's not important to make them easy to create.

Could you explain more clearly about which "typical software
technology" you're talking about.

I've had experience creating servers for client-server pairs under two
different systems -- Sun RPC and SYBASE's Open Server (DB-Library and
Server-Library) systems.  Both of these systems provide a base which
makes it just about as easy to create the server as create the client
(although using Sun RPC directly is a bit hairy, using something like
rpcgen does indeed make the process about as easy as I've described).
SYBASE's Server-Library system also handles issues such as
multi-threading in the server almost transparently (i.e., the user
code has to worry about locking, semaphores, etc. where necessary, and
on some systems has to worry about occasionally yielding control in
long-running requests, but that's about it).

(Some of the words and phrases in the preceding paragraph are surely
copyrighted by someone.  So sue me.)

-- 
Jonathan Kamens                                         jik@MIT.Edu
MIT Information Systems/Athena              Moderator, news.answers
    (Send correspondence related to the news.answers newsgroup
        {and ONLY correspondence related to the newsgroup}
                 to news-answers-request@MIT.Edu.)

Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: dlray@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Donald L Ray)
Subject: Client/Server - rpc
Followup-To:  Don Ray ray8.@osu.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:24:50 GMT

Keywords:
Its my understanding that RPC -remote procedure calls- provides the
mechanisms through a local procedure that may be executed remotely on a
remote processor and results returned to the local procedure. How new
is this? Will this become a standard network communication protocol for
DCE?

I welcome any and all comments ?
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
From: donnyj@htsa.aha.nl (Donny Janzen)
Subject: Re: Client-Server
Keywords: Perfect
Organization: Algemene Hogeschool Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 11:33:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.111641.29400@htsa.aha.nl> jeroenkw@htsa.aha.nl (Jeroen Kwast) writes:
>
>Hello out there,

Hello to you too.

>We were supprised to hear that a newsgroup exists about our great client-server

Don't be, I've heard story's about your server which are absolutely awesome.

>If you know it please give us some comments!
>						MM.

Well I think this says it all.

*******************************************************************************
* donnyj@solist.htsa.aha.nl * Be excellent to each other dudes.               *
*******************************************************************************
* For god your soul,        * There is a difference between fucking and       *
* For me your flesh.        * making love, some people fuck the dead,         *
*                           * I make love to them. -AUTOPSY-(Mental Funeral)  *
*******************************************************************************
From: cme@ellisun.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
Subject: Re: Client/Server - rpc
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:24:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <1992Oct13.172450.29593@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> dlray@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Donald L Ray) writes:
>Its my understanding that RPC -remote procedure calls- provides the
>mechanisms through a local procedure that may be executed remotely on a
>remote processor and results returned to the local procedure. How new
>is this?


This is an old idea.  I've seen it in use in for over a decade.  I'm sure
it showed up even earlier than that.

It has a good point and a bad point.

The good point is that it's easy to program -- nothing new -- just the same
old procedure calls.

The bad point is that while the callee is doing its thing *and* while that
call is being transmitted *and* while the reply is coming back, the caller
is twiddling its thumbs -- either literally spinning or doing a task
switch.  As processors get faster, the time for the callee to do its thing
goes down -- but the communication time doesn't (since the speed of light
doesn't change).  So the number of instructions wasted in the caller goes
up, if the caller spins.  This forces the caller to task-switch or waste
time.


So -- you get a *big*, distributed system with lots of shared resources but
it runs like a PC Jr. (OK, so I exaggerate :-).
From: ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University)
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
Subject: Re: info on client-server implementations sought
Date: 8 Oct 92 11:09:14 +1300
Distribution: comp.client-server
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <Bvpstx.qA@news.larc.nasa.gov>, virtual@schug.larc.nasa.gov (Don H. Phillips) writes:
>       Our local IS shop is planning on replacing an application with
>       a "traditional" design which utilizes a terminal emulation
>       user interface, with one based on an X client-server architecture.

Highly biased personal opinion: X isn't a client-server architecture, it's
a master-slave architecture. And your desktop machine ends up being the slave.
That's not my idea of client-server at all.

>       The current configuration has the application, which uses an
>       SQL data base (ORACLE), running on a Decstation 5000 server.
>       The Decstation is attached to an ethernet which in turn is on
>       a node on a FDDI backbone local area network.  With about 30
>       simultaneous users, the current application is using about
>       30 percent of the available cpu time on the Decstation.  In
>       addition to the change in the interface, expansion of the user
>       base to level which would suggest about 50 simultaneous users
>       is anticipated.
>
>       The user machines constitute a heterogeneous environment.  The
>       majority of users have MacIntoshes, but Intel based PCs, Sun
>       Dec, SGI, HP .... workstations are also present in the environment.
>       The Macs have direct network connections (most do, all will).

Suggestion: why not look at DAL (Data Access Language) from Apple? According
to the list on page 72 of the August APDA Tools Catalog, you can get a DAL
server for Ultrix from Pacer Software, and that supports access to Ingres,
Informix, ORACLE and Sybase databases. On the client side, the DAL client
is included with Macintosh System 7, and is available as an add-in for System 6.
For DOS/Windows machines, a client is apparently available from Blyth Software
(developers of the Omnis database).

Various Mac applications can use DAL, either as standard or with an optional
add-on. Excel includes DAL support in the box.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro                       fone: +64-7-856-2889
Computer Services Dept                     fax: +64-7-838-4066
University of Waikato            electric mail: ldo@waikato.ac.nz
Hamilton, New Zealand    37^ 47' 26" S, 175^ 19' 7" E, GMT+13:00
To someone with a hammer and a screwdriver, every problem looks
like a nail with threads.
From: wwm@ef5003.efhd.ford.com (Bill Meahan)
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
Subject: Re: Client-Server
Date: 15 Oct 1992 17:35:16 GMT
Organization: Ford Motor Co., EFHD Ypsilanti Operations
NNTP-Posting-Host: ef5003.efhd.ford.com

In article <1992Oct15.142133.7998@htsa.aha.nl> benc@htsa.aha.nl (Ben Castricum) writes:
>In article <1992Oct15.111641.29400@htsa.aha.nl> you write:
>>
>>Hello out there,
>>
>>We were supprised to hear that a newsgroup exists about our great client-server.
>>
>>If you know it please give us some comments!

For those of us who tuned in late? care to tell us what this is all
about?

WHOSE client-server?

From where?

For what platforms?

With what networks?

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????


(Methinks this group is about client-server in general, not somebody's
specific "product")



-- 
Bill Meahan			|EFHD Information Systems Staff
Plant Floor Systems Specialist	|Ford Motor Company
wwm@ef5003.efhd.ford.com      	| +1 313 487 6122
..!fmsrl7!pmsmam!wwm           |I'm not paid to speak for Ford!
Newsgroups: comp.client-server