Conference bulova::decw_jan-89_to_nov-90

>       �� I want to know a better method for thus system. So, please teach 
>          me if you have another idea about how to connect of VAX6410 and 
>          a hundred of DS3100.

Why let the 6410 do all the drawing? You seem to use the DS3100's only as
expensive DECwindows terminals. I think a better solution is to send messages
from the 6410 to the 100 DS3100's (via broadcast or point-to-point) and let
the program running on the DS3100 do the drawing.

Olav

       Certainly, the method you proposed is a better solution.
       But I'd like to get a better environment for users by the idea,
       that cut the load on DS3100.
       Therefore, I'd like to solve the following question become a basic
       for the solution.

       Q1 : If VAX 6410 needs to broadcast to 100 DS3100s simultaneously,
            is it feasible for VAX 6410 to process without having much 
            overhead?

       Q2 : How many windows can be controled by a single process on 
            VAX 6410 without any delay on accesses?

       Q3 : When five or six windows are open on a DS3100, how many process
            are necessary for VAX6410 to control smoothly?

       Q4 : How many windows can be controled by a single process on VAX
            6410 as a maximum?

       Q5 : Please tell me, a method better than Thus idea or you have
            another idea.

       
       
       	I wouldn't worry so much about "cutting the load" on the DS3100's.
       	They're bored out of thier mind most of the time in most of the 
       	applications I see.
       
       							mike

I'd be more worried about maxing out the 6410.  How much can you spread
the load out to the hot boxes?  (you did mean DS3100 as in DECstation, right
- MIPSco based?)

You'll have 100+ VUPS out on the desktops and 5-6 VUPS in the host.  hmmm...

       Re :  .3 and .4

       Certainly, DS3100 has a high quality as you said.
       But when the user demand to increase a function and a quantity of 
       the application, I want to add another VAX6410, not DS3100.

       The advantages of running application, on VAX6410 are :
        ��no more terminal will be added on user's desk.
        ��VAX6410 can manage the database of all applications.
        ��the application can use the index file.

       So, would anyone answer my questions? 

    I seem to remember a DECwindows V1 restriction that a single VMS
    program could only open 32 display connections simultaneously.
    I believe that this has been fixed in DECwindows V2. 
    
    However, I would be surprised if a single client on a 6410
    could drive 100 remote windows with reasonable performance. 

You'll probably get an answer to your question when you can tell us 
how many angels fit on the head of a pin!  It depends on the 
application and, as others have said, to utilize the hardware you need 
to respect the physical limitations involved.  If you want to use the
6410 as a database server, then do that, but trying to have it drive 
100 workstations being used as intelligent terminals is a real waste.  
We have lots of ways to do distributed processing and you shold follow 
those pointers.  DW takes a lot of client resources.  Adding that to 
your application will probably overload the 6410 in short order.

The answer is 42, but that may be for a different question!

      Re : .7 & .8

>>>    DW takes a lot of client resources.Adding that to your application 
>>>    will probably overload the 6410 in short order.
       
    
      ��Do you mean VAX 6410 has overload only by the client function
        of the application?
        Otherwise what type of the application is it?

      ��What client resources are used to DECwindows?
   

    
    
    I think  that  what  people  are  saying  is  that you should split you
    application into two pieces and put the part thataccesses the databases 
    on the 64xx and the graphics part on the DS3100. You'll have to define
    you're own application  protocol,  but the off-loading of graphics from
    the 6400 may be worth it. 
    
    Make use of the  CPU cycles where you have them.  Why make the DS3100's
    spend most of their time  in  the idle loop waiting on the VAX?  If you
    build  the  application  correctly, when you  need  to  add  additional
    database horsepower, you simple add another VAX,  when  you need to add
    more workstations, you simply plop down another DSx100.
    
    James