|
web
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Fat client - Server: Which technology?Hi,
Which technology's are used to make Windows Forms (Fat) Client - Server application with VB.NET (2.0)? - XML Webservices, Remoting, DCOM, ... are there others? - Which are used the most and why? - Pro's and cons? Any help or usefull links would be really appreciated! thanks a lot in advance, Pieter
Show quote
Hide quote
"Pieter Coucke" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> wrote in message Short answer: XML Web Services.news:%23CFDr$pcGHA.3908@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Hi, > > Which technology's are used to make Windows Forms (Fat) Client - Server > application with VB.NET (2.0)? > - XML Webservices, Remoting, DCOM, ... are there others? > - Which are used the most and why? > - Pro's and cons? > > Any help or usefull links would be really appreciated! > > thanks a lot in advance, > Long Answer Check out patterns & practices: Smart Client http://msdn.microsoft.com/practices/apptype/smartclient/ Smart Client Architecture and Design Guide http://msdn.microsoft.com/practices/apptype/smartclient/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnpag/html/scag.asp Smart Client Baseline Architecture Toolkit Home http://www.gotdotnet.com/codegallery/codegallery.aspx?id=941d2228-3bb5-42fd-8004-c08595821170 David "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted m***@hotmail.com> wrote in It did wants performance-test with XML Webservices (.NET 1.1) and abandonned message news:O1u6DRrcGHA.5048@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Short answer: XML Web Services. the use of it because of hte really poor performance, especially when having to select a lot of records. Did this get spectaculary better in the 2.0 Framework, or is this something you jsutn eed to live with when using Webservices? "Pieter Coucke" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> wrote in message Live with.news:eKQq1WrcGHA.4892@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted m***@hotmail.com> wrote in > message news:O1u6DRrcGHA.5048@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> Short answer: XML Web Services. > > It did wants performance-test with XML Webservices (.NET 1.1) and > abandonned the use of it because of hte really poor performance, > especially when having to select a lot of records. > > Did this get spectaculary better in the 2.0 Framework, or is this > something you jsutn eed to live with when using Webservices? > XML is XML. Computers are faster now, but all the methods mentioned have performance concerns. You really have to design around it by limiting the amount of data moved to and from the client. For some applications if performance is a huge concern, you can always just talk to your your database server. So either, go directly to the database, or use XML Web Services. Forget all the intermediate options. David Hi, Pieter:
try SocketPro at www.udaparts.com. Look at the article at http://www.udaparts.com/document/articles/dialupdb.htm SocketPro is especially great for building fat client -server applications. Nothing else can matche it! Regards, Show quoteHide quote "Pieter Coucke" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23CFDr$pcGHA.3908@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Hi, > > Which technology's are used to make Windows Forms (Fat) Client - Server > application with VB.NET (2.0)? > - XML Webservices, Remoting, DCOM, ... are there others? > - Which are used the most and why? > - Pro's and cons? > > Any help or usefull links would be really appreciated! > > thanks a lot in advance, > > Pieter > XML Web Services and Remoting are essentially the same thing, as are WCF
services (Vista). DCOM is largely out of the picture right now. The benefit of Remoting is the flexibility of protocol and the loss of being coupled with HTTP. But, this benefit, which was largely in performance, is pretty much gone now. The biggest benefit of Remoting, at this time, is stateful objects (marshall by reference). Web services have the benefit of being able to key them to a name service (UDDI) and have the client automatically check with the name service when it loses connectivity, giving you a lot of flexibility. The same can be done with Remoting, but you will have to build it. Moving from ASMX web services to WCF services is also an easy step, so you are heading in the correct direction for Vista. As for usage, I see a lot of Remoting. This is largely due to preoccupation with performance, even though acceptable level of service is not normally calculated prior to reducing cycles, so it is an artificial measure. In my experience, web services in 1.x were fine for apps and 2.0 are even faster, so the perf argument is bogus in most cases. In addition, I have found a great number of shops tying Remoting to SSL, which means the only perf benefit is the fact you do not have to go through a SOAP wrapper. So, you get very little perf benefit at the cost of a lot of lost maintainability. Not very wise. I am sure some will disagree with me. :-) -- Show quoteHide quoteGregory A. Beamer ************************************************* Think Outside the Box! ************************************************* "Pieter Coucke" <pietercou***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23CFDr$pcGHA.3908@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Hi, > > Which technology's are used to make Windows Forms (Fat) Client - Server > application with VB.NET (2.0)? > - XML Webservices, Remoting, DCOM, ... are there others? > - Which are used the most and why? > - Pro's and cons? > > Any help or usefull links would be really appreciated! > > thanks a lot in advance, > > Pieter > "Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)" <NoSpamMgbworld@comcast.netNoSpamM> wrote With remoting you also gain access to rich objects. With web services, in news:ODWM28wcGHA.5048@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl: > As for usage, I see a lot of Remoting. This is largely due to > preoccupation with performance, even though acceptable level of > service is not normally calculated prior to reducing cycles, so it is > an artificial measure. In my experience, web services in 1.x were fine > for apps and 2.0 are even faster, so the perf argument is bogus in > most cases. In addition, I have found a great number of shops tying > Remoting to SSL, which means the only perf benefit is the fact you do > not have to go through a SOAP wrapper. So, you get very little perf > benefit at the cost of a lot of lost maintainability. Not very wise. you're only able to transfer data objects. However, remoting is limited to the .NET platform - tho you can gain some interoperability by using the XML SOAP formatter. XML Web Services work fine for us. Just make sure to enable HTTP compression
on client and server or it will be slow. We typically get 6 to 1 compression ratios which really helps when sending big blobs of XML. Somebody once installed a proxy server that didn't support compression and the fat client users started complaining that everything was slow. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||