Re: [mail] Re: Native Win32 sources

On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, bpalmer wrote:

> > > D'Arcy,
> > >
> > > In production the database servers are seperate multi-processor machines
> > > with mirrored disks linked via Gigabit ethernet to the app server.
> > >
> > > In development I have people extremely familiar with MS, but not very hot
> > > with Unix in any flavour, who are developing Java and PHP code which is then
> > > passed into the QA phase where it's run on a replica of the production
> > > environment.
> > >
> > > My goal is to allow my developers to work on the platform they know (MS),
> > > using as many of the aspects of the production environment as possible (JVM
> > > version, PHP version, and hopefully database version), without needing to
> > > buy each new developer two machines, and incur the overhead of them
> > > familiarising themselves with a flavour of Unix.
>
> (from experience in a large .com web site)
>
> Can you have a central DB server? Do all the dev DB servers need to be
> independent? You could even have a machine w/ ip*(# developers) and bind
> a postgresql to each ip for each developer (assuming you had enough
> memory, etc).
>
> We used oracle once upon a time at my .com and used seperate schemas for
> the seperate developers. This may be tricky for your environment
> because the developers would need to know what schema they would connect
> to if all schemas were under the same pgsql instance.

From what the original post was saying, it looks more like they're working
on a smaller semi-embedded type thing, like a home database of cds or
something like that. OR at least something small like one or two people
would use like maybe a small inventory system or something.

High speed under heavy parallel access wasn't as important as good speed
for one or two users for this application.