RE: Reality Check and Ideas

Justin R. Erenkrantz (justin nospam at erenkrantz.com)
Wed, 10 Mar 1999 09:05:01 -0800

Isn't the point if that we use DNS, we have a standard system - no coding
involved for server or communication. The emphasis is on the client to
handle the data. However, Jason made the point about how do we keep track
of DB collisions? The majority rules is seeming to be the best idea, but
how does DNS handle this problem? (This is a question for Alan...) The
other problem with SQL is going to be the replication of the data across the
network. Access has zero replication abilities. DNS IS purely based on
replication. I believe from a purely logical perspective that RDBMS makes
the most sense (it is how we visualize the situation), but DNS is a VERY
intriguing idea (if we can get the semantics of representation down)...

Later,
Justin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-cdindex nospam at freeamp.org [mailto:owner-cdindex nospam at freeamp.org]On
> Behalf Of Larry Kain
> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 1999 8:37 AM
> To: cdindex nospam at freeamp.org
> Subject: RE: Reality Check and Ideas
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-cdindex nospam at freeamp.org [mailto:owner-cdindex nospam at freeamp.org]On
> > Behalf Of August Zajonc
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 1999 11:14 AM
> > To: cdindex nospam at freeamp.org
> > Subject: Re: Reality Check and Ideas
> >
> >
> > Flood fill using sanity checks for what purpose? Added complication (you
> > need to code it all, make it x-platform) so that I get what? A
> proprietary
> > DB on my system? No thanks... I'll take MySQL on FreeBSD and Access on
> > Windows and ..... Tables, fields and values defined by SQL,
> > dumpable to text
> > files for different implementations (DNS vs HTTP etc...)
> >
> > August
> >
>
> Excellent point!
>
> -larry
>
>