NAV 2009 RTC network stats

kine

I have created some stats about network bandwidth of RTC and Classic client. You can read it on my blog. If you want to discuss the network bandwidth of the new RTC client, we can discuss in this post...

Right now it looks like the bandwidth is half of classic client, but all depends on how many postings/data processing are there and how much and what you are printing...

but definitely not "thin" client for you, who are thinking about RTC as about thin client...

DenSter

There is a HUGE difference between wat YOU think 3 tier SHOULD be, and what 3 tier NAV is. I'm not going to go into any discussion about whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, but that's the way it is.

The RTC is not a thin client.

David_Singleton

DenSter wrote:

There is a HUGE difference between wat YOU think 3 tier SHOULD be, and what 3 tier NAV is. I'm not going to go into any discussion about whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, but that's the way it is.

The RTC is not a thin client.

Just imagine.... if 18 months ago we didn't have an NDA to worry about none of this thin client think client confusion would have happened. ](*,)

DenSter

BlackTiger wrote:

It's became very popular to "reinvent" something, including wheel.
For me NAV2009 looks like... very thick... browser... "plus one".

I wonder why you feel the need to make everything so negative. You're not even giving constructive criticism, it's always breaking down everything about it. Why are you even working with NAV if you think it's such piece of crap?

DenSter

David Singleton wrote:

Just imagine.... if 18 months ago we didn't have an NDA to worry about none of this thin client think client confusion would have happened. ](*,)

I don't think it would have made much of a difference with certain people, but yes I wish we had been able to discuss these things even 3 years ago when the rumors started flying around.

David_Singleton

DenSter wrote:

David Singleton wrote:

Just imagine.... if 18 months ago we didn't have an NDA to worry about none of this thin client think client confusion would have happened. ](*,)

I don't think it would have made much of a difference with certain people, but yes I wish we had been able to discuss these things even 3 years ago when the rumors started flying around.

Ah but just that miss pronounciation of "Thin" when they meant to say "Thiner" would have made a lot of difference.

kine

BlackTiger wrote:

kine wrote:

...but all depends on how many postings/data processing are there...

:-k
You sure? May be I'm wrong, but in "3tier" mode all "magic" happens in "application server". "Client" just sends "request" and receives "replies". "request" usually very small, "reply" - result set. So there is no place for "posting". In old client all "magic" was on client's side.

If RTC uses XML as format to communicate with server then... traffic will be huge. Biggest XML problem - data overheads. How many "additional" bytes are used to transfer 1 byte of actual data? A lot. Binary format is much more effective.

I am not talking about where the posting will happen. For me, as "user", I am just posting, and I measured the data flowing between RTC and Service-tier. I know that the posting will be done on the service-tier, but it doesn't matter from my "user" point of view, it is still posting during which the RTC is communicating with service-tier. ;-) And the bandwidth is much better...