"Old" news now, but for those that aren't aware ...

ftp://ftp.tigerlogic.com/pub/Windows...leaseNotes.pdf

On 2010-09-29 01:45:50 -0400, Ross Ferris <rossf (AT) stamina (DOT) com.au> said:

It's interesting that TL named their .Net and Java communication
protocol MVSP (multivalue server protocol). I wonder why a generic
name instead of something "branded" like D3SP?

Do you think they may wish other vendors to adopt MVSP as a standard?
I don't see it mentioned anywhere that MVSP is an open protocol, so
perhaps there's really no great meaning to the name at all.

--
Kevin Powick

Kevin Powick wrote:
As I understand it, the exact same MVSP product works exactly the same
for both D3 and mvBase. So while a "D3" moniker isn't a good fit,
MVSP isn't destined to be an industry standard either.

I've written a comparison of MVSP with mv.NET for my blog but haven't
published yet. I need to get my facts checked. Expect it within the
next week or so.

MVSP is for MV people:
- just getting started with .NET
- just getting started with Java
- looking for an alternative to the D3 Class Library
- looking for a pipe into mvBase other than FlashCONNECT (which has a
Java interface)
- looking for something free and provided by the DBMS vendor
- who don't understand why mv.NET is much better in the long term

T

On 2010-09-29 11:19:20 -0400, Tony Gravagno <nospam (AT) nospam (DOT) invalid> said:
Right. Makes sense.

I know that mv.NET provides a much richer toolset and is more mature
than MVSP, but to say that in the long run mv.NET would be better for
*everyone* is certainly not true, nor can it be proven.

For many, mv.NET *may* be the solution of choice.

Btw, does mv.NET still rely on a relatively low throughput Telnet
connection to D3 products?

--
Kevin Powick

To: Tony Gravagno
Tony wrote:
D3 class library...

g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.91
The Retro Archive - telnet://bbs.retroarchive.org

Kevin Powick wrote:
As I understand it, the exact same MVSP product works exactly the same
for both D3 and mvBase. So while a "D3" moniker isn't a good fit,
MVSP isn't destined to be an industry standard either.

I've written a comparison of MVSP with mv.NET for my blog but haven't
published yet. I need to get my facts checked. Expect it within the
next week or so.

MVSP is for MV people:
- just getting started with .NET
- just getting started with Java
- looking for an alternative to the D3 Class Library
- looking for a pipe into mvBase other than FlashCONNECT (which has a
Java interface)
- looking for something free and provided by the DBMS vendor
- who don't understand why mv.NET is much better in the long term

T

On Sep 30, 1:36*am, Kevin Powick <nos... (AT) spamless (DOT) com> wrote:
From what the TL guys said in their "Downunder": tour, I believe
mv.NET may be "enhanced" in the near future to use the MVSP for
connecting to D3 ... if REALLY interested, speak to the blue guys :-)

Kevin Powick wrote:

Dangit, I not only missed the intended and required winky but somehow
I double posted. Sorry bout that.

I won't speak for anyone who can speak for themselves here, but there
is agreement among some vendors that mv.NET fits a wide variety of
situations, but not all. After getting a better understanding of a
prospect's needs, we won't try to sell it to anyone who really can't
make good use of it over available freeware. We're selling solutions,
not licenses. So we're very much in agreement with you Kevin. Hey,
remember that I'm the "right tools for the job" guy, no matter how
many people here dislike the phrase.


Yes. I've only had one complaint about performance, and that was from
Gene who was comparing it to the D3 Class Library. Let's be frank
about this: The performance is acceptable, adequate, reasonable, "as
good as one can expect". It gets the job done quite well. But going
through D3 Telnet it's not as fast as on other platforms. Pete
Schellenbach has called the D3 Telnet implementation "brain dead" for
various reasons. mv.NET was enhanced to use the D3 Class Library in
an attempt to make use of a faster pipe but that never worked and was
never really promoted for general use. That leaves us with Telnet for
D3 until we get the enhancement to support MVSP as the underlying
pipe. I hope that will be faster though we'll find out only when we
try it. (This might apply to mvBase too.)

BTW: For U2, mv.NET can use Telnet or UO.NET for connectivity. For
QM it uses Telnet or QMClient.

mv.NET has a lot of value which I won't go into here. When Gene
selects the D3 Class Library over mv.NET, he gets better throughput
but he doesn't get the extended libraries, session pooling, network
capabilities, code generation, and many other features. It's a trade
off. People never call me and say "I need a fast pipe", they tell me
they're building a web site or exchanging data with a relational
environment - and then we talk about how the mv.NET library can be
used to do that.

As time permits, I'm working on compression algorithms to help get
better throughput from mv.NET and other connectivity software. If
anyone here has done this kind of thing before with MV BASIC, please
let me know.

HTH
T

Tony Gravagno
Nebula Research and Development
TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com
Nebula R&D sells mv.NET worldwide
and provides related development services
remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog
Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute!
http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno