DOCSLIB.ORG

Reassessing Client/Server Tools and Technologies Lawrence K

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reassessing Client/Server Tools and Technologies Lawrence K Previous 4-04-40 Reassessing Client/Server Tools and Technologies Lawrence K. Cooper John S. Whetstone Payoff Client/server computing has not yet realized its promise of faster applications development, reduced maintenance costs, and enterprise scalability. This article's review of client/server technologies from the perspective of whether they cause developers to focus more on the tool than on the business problem helps IS and business managers appreciate what each technology can and cannot do. Understanding that client/server computing is more a concept than a technology is key to the proper evaluation of the tools and strategies flooding the marketplace. Introduction During the past 10 years, client/server architecture and technologies have been hailed as spelling the demise of the mainframe-centric view of computing. Corporations purchased PC by the truckload and bought myriad development tools, languages, and frameworks for developers and users alike. Products with descriptions such as GUI-builders, front ends, gateways, back ends, middleware, and glue flooded the client/server marketplace. Applications were supposed to be able to be developed faster and maintenance costs were supposed to decrease. Clearly this has not been the case: Client/server computing has proven to be both a boon and a bust. Although it provides more flexibility, it requires more computing resources, faster networks, and higher maintenance. According to a recent Gartner study, client/server computing costs often exceed mainframe-centric computing by up to 70%. Client/server computing also poses an abundance of data security problems. Current technologies are at a middle stage between the rigorous structures of mainframes and the total openness implicit in many of the new architectures. These problems notwithstanding, client/server technology is a core building block for most corporate IT strategies. Even so, its true potential remains largely untapped. The Gartner Group estimates that 90% of all client/server applications deployed today are two-tier: The Standish Group puts that figure at 95%. Either way, nine out of every 10 client/server applications deployed use a model developed in the mid-1980s. Conversely, only one in 10 applications is based on the more recent three-tier, multitier, tierless, or distributed computing models. The problem is that developers are spending far too much time on the technology and not nearly enough time on the business problems they are supposed to be solving. Computer Technology Research (CTR) Corp. reported that because client/server projects often do not scale from the workgroup to the enterprise, applications either lack the flexibility to meet the needs of the corporation as a whole or “fail to meet the demands of the software life cycle and make programmers work more than they should.” Although corporations should not turn back the clock to the mainframe in the glass house, IS managers and their staffs require a more careful understanding of the client/server marketplace and of organizational needs before proceeding further into the murky world of client/server computing. After providing a brief overview of the current state of client/server models, this article discusses client/server technologies from two Previous perspectives: Technologies that force developers to focus more on the tool than on the business problem, such as DCE and CORBA, and technologies that developers can more readily use to build systems. Although many people immediately think of products like PowerBuilder and Visual BASIC when client/server computing is mentioned, these products are not considered because they are only capable of supporting the front end of a two-tier client/server solution. Overview of Client/Server Model The Two-Tier Model The now-famous two-tier client/server model first presented by the Gartner Group in the 1980s still predominates the market. Within this computing model, the client and server are both hardware. The two-tier model provides several options varying from distributed presentation to distributed data management. In all cases, however, the only real choice is on which machine the various components of the presentation, logic, and data access layers are to be located. This hardware-oriented model places limits on the transfer of data and is the culprit for repetitive network bottlenecks, the bane of many organizations. Yet, the complexity of applications in today's business climate, however, necessitates the transfer of massive amounts of information collected from disparate and distributed data sources. The way in which an application is partitioned under this model is driven by hardware/locational decisions rather than by business-function or application-logic decisions. Many of the so-called client/server tools of today such as PowerBuilder and Visual Basic are merely presentation layers for back-end data bases. Although such tools are also used to place some of the application logic in the client, they do not allow application logic to be easily moved from a client application to a server application or from one hardware platform to another. The Three-Tier Model The three-tier architecture attempts to overcome the application partitioning and performance limitations of the two-tier model by providing a clear separation between the presentation, functionality, and data layers. The presentation layer uses a graphical user interface (GUI) to present information; the functionality layer performs the business logic and the flow of related transactions; and the data layer consists of the data sources that the functional layer accesses. The data sources include data bases, legacy systems, data feeds, and file structures. Thus the application logic can access multiple data sources. Because it can also be modified to meet changing requirements without changing all client-side applications, myriad configurations are possible to meet specific business problems. Initial three-tier applications were often developed using the stored-procedure capabilities of the data base, which allowed business logic to be moved back and forth from the client application into the server application with relative ease. The skills IT staff need for developing three-tier applications using stored procedures do not differ substantially from the skills already acquired in developing and maintaining two-tier applications. Although stored procedures permit code to be reused across applications that are deployed on the same RDBMS, they do not allow code reuse across different vendors' RDBMSs. The three-tier and multitier architectures require both IT management and staff to think Previous in new ways. The new technologies that served as the catalyst for change are being enhanced and modified almost daily. No longer can an IS department expect to learn a single language or development methodology and be able to meet either short-run tactical or long-term strategic goals. To complicate matters further, many organizations are demanding that applications be conceived, specified, developed, and deployed and show a return on investment in six to 12 months. Technology-Focused Architectures: DCE and CORBA The challenge for most IT departments is not only choosing the right client/server architecture, but also making the right selections from an ever-growing array of software tools that promise simple solutions to complex problems. The problem is that many of the products and approaches are technology- rather than business-focused; in other words, IT staff must spend considerable time and expense to understand the technology before they can use it to solve the business problems of their organization. The OSF's DCE The OSF DCE supports three distributed computing models: · The client/server model. · The RPC model. · The data-sharing model. The client/server model permits applications to be split across multiple disparate platforms running multiple disparate operating systems. A common matching protocol between two applications or utilities is defined, allowing applications to pair up into unique client/server relationships. The RPC model permits programmers to write client applications that call server services, without having any specific or required knowledge of where or how the called server is located. It involves the customized definition of client/server relationships between unique application modules. The data-sharing model facilitates seamless data distribution among the participating machines on a network. DCE also provides services for distributing applications in heterogeneous hardware and software environments: Basic distributed services enable developers to build applications, and data-sharing services provide a distributed file system for seamless data distribution, diskless system support, and desktop computer integration. DCE enables applications distributed across disparate hardware and operating system platforms to appear as a single system to the user. Most DCE implementations of client and server application relationships are accomplished using the DCE RPC interface. Although this method is highly effective, especially when coupled with DCE's threading capabilities, Kerberos security, and the DCE cell directory service (which provides named location independence for applications), it takes more time to develop DCE-based applications than to develop similar functionality using traditional client/server frameworks. It is the raw nature of applications development using the DCE RPC interface that has probably been the greatest
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eeeeett., '1 H-{6'~-H~-4Ttf1ete
    ~eeeeett., '1 H-{6'~-H~-4ttf1ete ommission Delegation European C ~~;;~ street, NW ~ JANVIER 199 7 '1W&Shin.gton, DO 2 Message de Monsieur E. BRACKENIERS . 3 COMMUNICATIONS . 5 STB INFO ................................................ 7 INFORMATIONS DU CENTRE DE CALCUL ....................... 18 ARTICLES . Translation Centre for the bodies of the European Union ............... 21 . La signature électronique . 22 . SNet - les fondations ........................................ 26 . INTRANET- Application architectures ............................ 27 . INTRANET - Application development tools ........................ 35 . Migration "Nouvelle plate-forme technologique" en site pilote à la DI ...... 44 . D'autres questions/réponses sur le projet 11Next Technological Platform" ..... 46 . New information technologies applied to statistics .................... 49 . SDTvista - vos originaux, nos traductions, des références intéressantes ...... 52 . Chaîne des SIC Outils logistiques ................................ 57· ORGANISATION ........................................... 61 TABLEAUX DE BORD . Budget informatique . 64 . Ressources humaines . 65 . Projets d'infrastructure ....................................... 67 . Formation ................................................ 68 LISTE DES PRODUITS ....................................... 72 COMITES 1 GROUPES DE TRAVAIL ............................ 91 -' CALENDRIER ............................................. 92 ~,---------------------------------------------------------~ lj C.E. 1 Direction Informatique
    [Show full text]
  • Class and Objects in C++ 193–278
    OBJECT-ORIENTED PROGRAMMING C++ SIMPLIFIED OBJECT-ORIENTEDOBJECT-ORIENTED PROGRAMMINGPROGRAMMING C++C++ SIMPLIFIEDSIMPLIFIED By HARI MOHAN PANDEY Assistant Professor Computer Engineering Department NMIMS University Mumbai (Maharashtra) UNIVERSITY SCIENCE PRESS !N)MPRINTOF,AXMI0UBLICATIONS0VT,TD "E.'!,U2U ∑ #(%..!)∑ #/#(). ∑ '57!(!4) ∑ (9$%2!"!$ *!,!.$(!2∑ +/,+!4! ∑ ,5#+./7 ∑ -5-"!) ∑ 2!.#() ∑ NEW DELHI ).$)! 53! '(!.!∑ +%.9! OBJECT-ORIENTED PROGRAMMING C++ SIMPLIFIED © by Laxmi Publications (P) Ltd. All rights reserved including those of translation into other languages. In accordance with the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise. Any such act or scanning, uploading, and or electronic sharing of any part of this book without the permission of the publisher constitutes unlawful piracy and theft of the copyright holder’s intellectual property. If you would like to use material from the book (other than for review purposes), prior written permission must be obtained from the publishers. Typeset at ABRO Enterprises, Delhi First Edition: 2015 ISBN 978-93-81159-50-7 Limits of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: The publisher and the author make no representation or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties. The advice, strategies, and activities contained herein may not be suitable for every situation. In performing activities adult supervision must be sought. Likewise, common sense and care are essential to the conduct of any and all activities, whether described in this book or otherwise. Neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable or assumes any responsibility for any injuries or damages arising herefrom.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Douglas Craig Schmidt
    Dr. Douglas Craig Schmidt Cornelius Vanderbilt Professor of Engineering [email protected] Department of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science (TEL) 615-294-9573 Vanderbilt University (FAX) 615-343-7440 Nashville, TN 37203 (WEB) www.dre.vanderbilt.edu/∼schmidt/ Educational Background • Ph.D. Computer Science, summer 1994, University of California, Irvine Dissertation: \An Object-Oriented Framework for Experimenting with Alternative Process Archi- tectures for Parallelizing Communication Subsystems." Co-advisors: Dr. Tatsuya Suda and Dr. Richard W. Selby. • M.S. Computer Science, summer 1990, University of California, Irvine, specializing in software engineering. • M.A. Sociology, summer 1986, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia Thesis: \A Statistical Analysis of University Resource Allocation Policies." Advisor: Dr. Michael A. Faia. • B.A. Sociology, summer 1984, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia. Professional Experience 1. 7/1/18 { present: Associate Provost of Research Development and Technologies Develop cohesive and sustainable information technology (IT) services to advance research and scholarship across Vanderbilt's ten schools and colleges; develop scalable storage and processing solutions by leveraging on-campus and cloud data storage services, as well as creating big data research cores and core-related services; and implement NIST 800-171 compliant IT services. 2. 8/1/18 { present: Co-Director of the Vanderbilt Data Science Institute Facilitate highly innovative research and education initiatives that build on Vanderbilt University's current strengths, promote new collaborations, and establish a cohesive institutional framework that embraces Vanderbilt's diverse campus, while establishing the university as a leader in data science research and education. 3. 2/17 { present: Cornelius Vanderbilt Professor of Engineering Received an endowed chair in recognition of my scholarship, intellect, and leadership in the field of computer science and computer engineering.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1 a Survey Ofproducts
    Appendix 1 A Survey ofProducts We provide here a brief survey of products, based on the classification provided in Chapter 2 in the topic "Technology Architecture". We focus on middleware, and "go out" into development environments where applicable. Then we look at systems management. Components of the technology architecture that are not specific to the distributed application are mentioned in passing. Middleware SQL -based Middleware Standards Provides the transport for SQL calls and calls to stored procedures from the client. There are two basic approaches: • Embedded SQL (ESQL). ISO standard for embedding SQL in programming languages. Needs a precompiler; needs to know the target database at development time. • Call-level interfaces: API (Application Programming Interface). Calling program executes SQL at run time; no precompiler needed. De jure standard: SQL Access Group (SAG) CLI. De facto standard: • Microsoft ODBC (Open Database Connectivity): SAG CLI with extensions; • IDBC (Java Database Connectivity) is an emerging contender. Product Examples Call-level interfaces: ODBC, IDBC • ODBC: a Microsoft product, it enables access to different databases. Provides a call-level interface to the application (client). Supports a number of the popular databases (provides standard SQL plus specific extensions). However, support for some advanced features such as event triggering, coordination between different databases and switching between different access methods is questionable. 217 218 Distributed Applications Engineering • JDBC: a set
    [Show full text]
  • IBM DSS and DCE Cross-Platform Guide
    SG24-2543-01 IBM DSS and DCE Cross-Platform Guide December 1996 IBM International Technical Support Organization SG24-2543-01 IBM DSS and DCE Cross-Platform Guide December 1996 Take Note! Before using this information and the product it supports, be sure to read the general information in Appendix B, “Special Notices” on page 155. Second Edition (December 1996) This edition applies to: • OpenEdition DCE for use with OS/390 • OpenEdition DCE for VM/ESA, a feature of VM/ESA Version 2 • DCE Base Serivces/400 Version 3 for use with OS/400 Version 3 • DSS and DFS for AIX Version 4 Product Family for use with AIX Version 4 • DSS and DFS for OS/2 Warp, Version 4 • DCE for Windows 3.1 and Windows NT • Other IBM and non-IBM products Comments may be addressed to: IBM Corporation, International Technical Support Organization Dept. JN9B Building 045 Internal Zip 2834 11400 Burnet Road Austin, Texas 78758-3493 When you send information to IBM, you grant IBM a non-exclusive right to use or distribute the information in any way it believes appropriate without incurring any obligation to you. Copyright International Business Machines Corporation 1996. All rights reserved. Note to U.S. Government Users — Documentation related to restricted rights — Use, duplication or disclosure is subject to restrictions set forth in GSA ADP Schedule Contract with IBM Corp. Contents Figures . vii Tables . ix Preface . xi How This Redbook Is Organized ........................... xi The Team That Wrote This Redbook ......................... xii Comments Welcome . xiii Chapter 1. Distributed Computing and IBM′s Strategy .............. 1 1.1 The History of Distributed Computing .....................
    [Show full text]
  • Customer Success
    Customer Success eCube: fast starters How VisiBroker enabled innovation AT A GLANCE: eCUBE SYSTEMS How VisiBroker provides the best solution for eCube Systems As eCube Systems – specialists in middleware modernization – will confirm, speed is the key to development, especially on application start-up. eCube needed a high performance, enterprise-class solution and support from an enterprise-class vendor, familiar with large legacy systems. URL: www.ecubesystems.com Industry: Software SOLUTION Country: USA • VisiBroker® CHALLENGE HIGHLIGHTS eCube Systems specializes in CORBA, Entera/RPC-style middleware among other legacy and middleware technology • Fast start-up time platforms. It extends the life of valuable, more established • Responsive support organization enterprise applications. eCube’s NXTminder is a commercial • Robust – tried and tested product that manages distributed services. It tracks an technology application’s operational elements, improves application • High performance awareness and removes the complexity of using and maintaining • Sophisticated debugging features operational scripts. • Supports the widest range of But eCube needed a more robust ORB. Having used an open hardware, operating systems and source, Java-based, ORB (JacORB), which only adequately met compilers its business needs – and made its NXTminder product seem ‘sluggish‘ – eCube wanted a faster, more responsive ORB which could support its C++ development needs as well as Java. eCube Systems hoped a commercial ORB would deliver more sophisticated exception handling than the open source ORB. This “VisiBroker’s start-up time is a has in turn reduced overhead and allowed eCube Systems to differentiator and the competitive spend more resources on innovation. edge that we need to succeed.” The solution was Micro Focus’ Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA), VisiBroker.
    [Show full text]
  • Vendor List 99 1738 NEW DVD 4 6/25/04 10:39 AM Page 2
    99 1738 NEW DVD 4 6/25/04 10:39 AM Page 1 Vendor List 99 1738 NEW DVD 4 6/25/04 10:39 AM Page 2 2 Vendor List One of the most frustrating things about supporting PCs is finding a specific adapter board, part, dri- ver program, or whatever you need to make a system work. If you are supporting or installing prod- ucts, you will need access to technical support or documentation for products you might not have purchased. Over the years, I have compiled a list of companies whose products are popular or whose products I have found to work exceptionally well. I use these contacts regularly to provide informa- tion and components that enable me to support PC systems effectively. Many of these companies have been mentioned in this book, but others not specifically mentioned have been added here. These companies carry many computer products you will have contact with or that I simply recommend. I have tried to list as many vendors as possible. These vendors are important in day-to-day work with PC systems and can supply documentation for your components, provide parts and service, and be used as a source for new equipment and software. This list is as up-to-date as possible, but companies move or go out of business all the time. If you find any information in this list that is no longer accurate, please leave me a message at [email protected]. Although originally exclusively the domain of computer enthusiasts, today almost all companies use Internet Web sites to provide a high level of technical support.
    [Show full text]
  • Inprise Corp
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION FORM 10-K405 Annual report pursuant to section 13 and 15(d), Regulation S-K Item 405 Filing Date: 1999-03-31 | Period of Report: 1998-12-31 SEC Accession No. 0001012870-99-000955 (HTML Version on secdatabase.com) FILER INPRISE CORP Mailing Address Business Address 100 BORLAND WAY 100 BORLAND WAY CIK:853273| IRS No.: 942895440 | State of Incorp.:DE | Fiscal Year End: 1231 SCOTTS VALLEY CA 95066 SCOTTS VALLEY CA Type: 10-K405 | Act: 34 | File No.: 001-10824 | Film No.: 99582339 95066-3249 SIC: 7372 Prepackaged software 4084311000 Copyright © 2012 www.secdatabase.com. All Rights Reserved. Please Consider the Environment Before Printing This Document ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K [X]Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 For the year ended December 31, 1998 [_]Transition report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Commission File No. 0-16096 Inprise Corporation (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) <TABLE> <S> <C> Delaware 94-2895440 (State or other jurisdiction (I.R.S. Employer of incorporation or organization) Identification No.) </TABLE> 100 Enterprise Way, Scotts Valley, California 95066-3249 (Address if principal executive offices) (Zip code) Registrant's telephone number, including area code:
    [Show full text]
  • Our Brochure
    DOUBLEBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES www.doublebridge.com Leading software outsourcing company in China. Bridging Technologies and Your Business DOUBLEBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES Bridging Technologies and Your Business Table of Contents Minneapolis Boston Paris Beijing New California Denver Xiʼan Japan Texas Mexico 2 Who We Are Hong Kong 2 What We Do DoubleBridge Offices DoubleBridge Projects Locations 2 How We Do It Contact Information 3 Quality 3 Speed Headquarters - New Jersey DoubleBridge Technologies, Inc. 3 Methodology 103 Carnegie Center, Suite 317 3 Value Princeton, NJ 08540 Phone: +1-609-716-9001 4 DoubleBridge Outsourcing Services Fax: +1-609-716-9002 5 Unique Approach to Outsourcing Boston Office 5 Three Offshore Outsourcing Programs 20 Mall Road, Suite 151 Burlington, MA 01803 6 Major Service Lines Phone: +1-781-221-6909 6 Custom Software Development & Maintenance Fax: +1-781-221-6959 6 Database Services China Office - Beijing 6 Information Architecture & UI Design A2105, Eagle Run Plaza 6 ERP Systems Implementation & Maintenance No.26 Xiaoyun Road 7 e-Business & Internet Applications Beijing, China 7 Software Localization and Globalization Post Code: 100016 7 Quality Assurance & Testing Phone: +86-10-8458-4219 7 Legacy System Maintenance & Migration Fax: +86-10-8458-4219 ext 110 8 How We Are Structured General Inquiries For general inquiries, please send an e-mail to: 9-24 Case Studies 1 [email protected] [email protected] www.doublebridge.com DOUBLEBRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES Bridging Technologies and Your Business Company Facts Who We Are Established in 1997 by a group of DoubleBridge Technologies, Inc. is a leading provider of technology and innovative software services. Head- former Oracle, IBM and quartered in Princeton, New Jersey, USA, with worldwide offices in Boston, Toronto, Paris, Hong Kong and Microsoft employees.
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas Craig Schmidt Educational Background Professional
    Douglas Craig Schmidt Associate Professor [email protected] Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering (TEL) 949-824-7548 University of California, Irvine (FAX) 949-824-2321 Irvine, CA 92697-2625 http://www.ece.uci.edu/ schmidt/ Educational Background Ph.D. Computer Science, summer 1994, University of California, Irvine Dissertation: “An Object-Oriented Framework for Experimenting with Alternative Process Architectures for Parallelizing Communication Subsystems.” Co-advisors: Dr. Tatsuya Suda and Dr. Richard W. Selby M.S. Computer Science, summer 1990, University of California, Irvine, specializing in soft- ware engineering M.A. Sociology, summer 1986, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia Thesis: “A Statistical Analysis of University Resource Allocation Policies.” Advisor: Dr. Michael A. Faia B.A. Sociology, summer 1984, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia Professional Experience 3/02 – present: Program Manager Currently leading the national effort on middleware as a Program Manager for over $60 million dollars of funding at the DARPA Information Exploitation Office (IXO). Programs include Program Composition for Embedded Systems (PCES). 9/01 – 3/02: Deputy Director Served as the Deputy Director for the DARPA Information Technology Office (ITO), helping to set the national IT research and development agenda and manage programs on autonomous systems, network-centric command and control systems, distributed real-time and embedded systems, and augmented cognition for the U.S. Department of Defense. 6/00 – 3/02: Program Manager Currently leading the national effort on middleware as a Program Manager for over $60 million dollars of funding at the DARPA Information Technology Office (ITO). Programs included the Program Composition for Embedded Systems (PCES).
    [Show full text]
  • App Server Focus:Best Practices for Writing EJB
    ANNOUNCINGWEBSERVICESEDGE 2001P.103 TM The World’s Leading Java Resource Java COM April 2001 Volume:6 Issue:4 Sept 23–26, 2001 New York, NY 98 Oct 22–25, 2001 Santa Clara, CA 2001 104 Editorial by Sean Rhody pg. 5 App Server Focus: Best Practices for Sandra L. Emerson, From the Editor If you write EJBs Michael Girdley & Rob Woollen for aapp servers, these best by Alan Williamson pg. 7 Writing EJB Applications practices are for Avoid reinventing the wheel yJou 8 Enterprise Java 1 2 by Tony Loton pg. 60 J2EE: Guaranteed Messaging with JMS David Chappell Make sure your business-critical data & Richard Monson-Haefel Product Reviews 3 WebSphere 3.5 pg. 84 reaches its destination PART 2 18 n? Borland AppServer 4.5 pg. 100 4 App Server Focus: From Web Sites to Phil Costa VisualAge Repository How can app servers ease the transition? 26 by Tim deBoer, Steve Francisco Web Services and Wireless E1 A2 C2 B3 & Ellen McKay pg. 88 Server Replica S E2 CORBA Corner: OMG’s New Fault Tolerant 1 D3 Jon Siegel Java Code CORBA Specification Online redundancy can save the day 32 by Anthony Meyer pg. 92 create a foundation App Server Focus: Create a Foundation N Matt Creason First Look CocoBase pg. 106 Build an application server infrastructure EJB JSP 40 create a foundation HTTP RETAILERS PLEASE DISPLAY r e r u t c u r t s a r f n i app JLink: Creating Reusable Enterprise e Mani Malarvannan UNTIL JUNE 30, 2001 v r e $4.99US $6.99CAN Components Using J2EE Cybelink’s Jlinks architecture PART 2 44 E Applications ce and Scalability App Server Focus: Building J2EE Apps for EEWRITTEN BY MISHA DAVIDSON Misha Davidson Performance and Scalability Techniques, optimizations, and examples 50 App Server Focus: Application Server Sudhakar Ramakrishnan Metamorphosis & Christopher G.
    [Show full text]