[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
From: Amy Lewis [mailto:amyzing@talsever.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 12:54 PM
> So: sometimes it makes sense to have silly-little-services
> that aren't terribly exciting by themselves ... because one
> can foresee that they will get aggregated.
>
> Amy!
I think this is a good point. And, in a way, I think it's related to the
point that Len made in
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200201/msg00443.html, except that he
was talking about "how do you define ROI ($$$ vs. usefulness)", and now
we're talking about "how do you define Best Practice (scalability vs.
usefulness)".
Most of the Best Practices put forth so far have been concerned with
scalability-type issues, whereas sometimes you're more interested in the
function than in the speed and/or scalability. (I would say that #6 in
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200201/msg00438.html is the only one
that isn't related to scalability.)
So maybe, when the Best Practices are published, they should have that point
emphasized? i.e., "when we say 'stay away from fine grained RPC services',
this is for scalability reasons, and not for design reasons".
David Hunter
Senior Architect
ViaFone Inc.
david.hunter@mobileq.com
http://www.mobileq.com
|
