Re: Looking for various PHP options running on i

Comments in-line Jack.


Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com

On Jul 16, 2018, at 6:09 PM, Jack Woehr <jwoehr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Why - what possible benefit other than increased complexity and another
failure point?


Jon Paris

Jon --

``I'm glad you asked that ...'' :)

Answer: Two-tier or three-tier is a better architecture for secure, robust
apps drawing data from IBM i.

Not really. The more tiers the more failure points. How can it be otherwise?

Microservices allow a factoring of functionality. Delivery of end services
on the second tier is a composition from extant, well-formed verbs.

Microservices are rapid to code and fit in with development sprints.

That I agree with. But you don't need to inject a separate Linux infrastructure to do them.

Let IBM i do what IBM i does best: Store and deliver data.

Let Linux do what Linux does best: provide a development environment and
hosting platform for outward-facing end-user web services.

If you ignore the fact that Linux imposes additional management, support, and maintenance requirements. You're also inevitably going to have to deal with load balancing and a bunch of other other stuff that most IBM i shops don't have to worry about). More in a moment though.

Why everyone tries to squeeze the web server down onto the IBM i, where it
is harder to develop, runs slower, and exposes the server more to the
outside world, is only barely understandable, though I do understand.

My clients who tried to shoehorn the whole legacy modernization onto the i
itself have all regretted it and moved to multi-tier.

If I'm using Python/PHP/whatever I fail to see why it is any harder to develop on the i. Runs slower? Maybe - but many of the people I have worked with have significant extra capacity and it is early an issue. Understandable? Exposing the server? Only if you don't do it the right way.

Well that comes back to the point I said I'd return to. If what I have in the shop is IBM i then I don't have the "Understandable" issue. I do however have a HUGE "Understandable" issue with Linux. Since, in most cases, the shops I deal with already have Windows infrastructure in place I'd look more favourably on a tiered solution based on Windows - much as I detest WIndows. I just don't see the joy of introducing new infrastructure and support issues for the sake of it.

You're a bit-head Jack - you like the construction kit approach that Linux offers you. But it is not what my clients bought into IBM i for. If there is already Linux in the shop, fine, but I just don't see introducing it for the sake of it. Plus of course I can always run it in a partition on the IBM i - don't need a separate box <grin>

--
Absolute Performance, Inc.
12303 Airport Way, Suite 100
Broomfield, CO 80021

NON-DISCLOSURE NOTICE: This communication including any and all
attachments is for the intended recipient(s) only and may contain
confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient of this communication, any disclosure, copying further
distribution or use of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete/destroy
all copies of this communication immediately.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link: http://amzn.to/2dEadiD