Tony Marston wrote:
"Michael Austin" <ma*****@firstdbasource.com> wrote in message
news:bP******************@newssvr22.news.prodigy.c om...
<snip> The 3-Tier architecture does NOT necessarily mean having an application
server between the Presentation layer and the Data Access layer. You are
confusing a 'logical' 3 tier structure with a 'physical' 3 tier structure.
Thanks for the clarification but my reply was a basic explaination with a real
example of how it "could" be built not necessisarly a complete dissertation on
the subject. :)
that then communicates with your PHP app to store the data in MySQL. The
levels of data obfuscation are virtually unlimited.
But if you have too many levels your application may become so unwieldy that
it is virtually useless. I have seen it done.
There is a LOT to be said for the old "green-screen" mini- and mainframe
systems. When speed is of the essence, a GUI with drop-downs and text boxes and
radio buttons for every aspect of a transaction, is NOT the answer. I know of
an app that uses a pen-activated tablet that the user can enter the data for 10
transactions while the mouse-equivelant does one.
Multi-tiered apps supposedly were to make things easier, but some companies now
pay many times more to do the same thing - not any faster or better - than the
"legacy" system they replaced. Now they need admins for the middle tier, the
backend tier (system and database) and the user tier, not to mention the
increased complexity of the networks - for which you also need a admins. They
may save a few bucks on the actual server hardware, but the overall cost is
significantly higher in manpower and licensing fees for the various "tiers", but
most companies have yet to figure that out!!!
One such app that I am personnally aware of goes something like this:
The company decided to get away from "dumb" terminals (green-screens) and
commissioned a multi-tiered architecture system "because it was cool". If they
had simply updated/upgraded the current system, it could have cost them maybe
another $200K-$300K Instead they replaced it with a backend MS (NT/SQL Server)
at a cost of ~40K for the hardware and another large chunk for SQLServer (don't
recall what that cost them), they also added a middle tier (4-6 servers) that
cost them ~20-30K. They bought new desktops (~100@900 each including the MS
licenses etc) They also had to hire 6-8 "admins" at an average of 35K-45K/yr +
benefits to administer the whole thing. So, where did they "save"? BTW, there
was only 1 "legacy" system admin and someone capable of stepping in if he was on
vacation.
This "legacy" system is still produced and updated and not "legacy" at all.
MS and MS-centric management is NOT the answer to companies IT problems, it is
the cause.
--
Michael Austin.
Donations STILL welcomed.
Http://www.firstdbasource.com/donations.html
:)