The concern about overhead can be allied by placing a binary flag in the
IMAGE call, eg
1 = validate using imbedded rules and
0 = skip validation

Frank Gribbin
Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP


On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 23:19:17 -0500, Doug Werth <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>
>This discussion has also revolved around many issues, one being
performance.
>If Image were enhanced to include data validation, how much overhead is
>added to each and every transaction? Do the current benchmarks use
>previously validated data for input? Would Image truly be able to compete
>performance-wise if it had to validate each field?
>
>Theoretically it shouldn't add much overhead overall to an application
>whether the validation is done in Image or in a program that runs on the
>3000 when you add the aggregate CPU cost for the transaction assuming the
>following equation is true.
>
> App with validation + Image = Thin app. + Image with validation
>
>
>But, if batch input is coming from a front end data entry system where the
>data has already been validated then Image would just add more overhead to
>each transaction.
>
>I'm still "on the fence" on this issue. But I am concerned about the
>performance impact on existing applications and it should be weighed
against
>the benefits it would provide. A good data entry system will likely be
>validating data up front using business rules in a way that can very
>difficult for DBMS.
>
>Doug.
>
>Doug Werth                             Beechglen Development Inc.
>[log in to unmask]                               Cincinnati, Ohio