Received: from bush.rutgersinsurance.com (rutgersinsurance.com
 [38.138.71.194])
	by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eA1Gbtl73327
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:37:55 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from aalang@rutgersinsurance.com)
Received: from 6014cwpza006 ([10.10.10.51])
	by bush.rutgersinsurance.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA04825
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:43:00 -0500
Message-ID: <016401c04422$6b8db600$330a0a0a@6014cwpza006>
From: "Adam Lang" <aalang@rutgersinsurance.com>
To: <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>
References: <SAK.2000.11.01.bcgmfmgqsjqscnak@a.b.c>
Subject: Re: Connecting remotely.
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:40:18 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-Archive-Number: 200011/14
X-Sequence-Number: 49

What's the difference between having the client use ADO to talk to the
database as opposed to an interface using the postgresql client libraries?

Adam Lang
Systems Engineer
Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sergio A. Kessler" <sak@tribctas.gba.gov.ar>
To: <aalang@rutgersinsurance.com>; <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 11:18 AM
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Connecting remotely.


> "Adam Lang" <aalang@rutgersinsurance.com> el día Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:52:35
> -0500, escribió:
>
> [...]
> >
> >What are people's thoughts?
>
> people's thoughts are that you really want to design a multi-thier
> design (for example a 3 layer design), where
>
>                                             /  client1 (browser)
>  database  <--->   bussines rules           -  client2 (browser)
>                   (ie. apache, php,...)     \  .....
>
>
> if your client has direct access to the database, you design is broken...
>
> sergio