> -----Original Message----- > From: Slide Users Mailing List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 6:50 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Using the slide api directly vs. using the webdav client > > I don't think performance is going to be the issue here. If > your client and server are on the same machine, the overhead > of http will be minimal. The big advantage that outweighs
Actually, I've heard two quite opposite opinions. I wonder if somebody has actually measured this difference somehow... :-) > performance will be the fact that webdav and deltaV are > published APIs and are not bound to change. There is no such > guarantee with the slide API. In fact, if you look at the > source, you will find that the SLIDE apis are not explicity That's right and we've introduced a special layer in our application that isolates Slide core from our domain model. So we don't have to rewrite the whole system when Slide core api changes. This layer takes care of versioning as well. Yours sincerely, Andrey. > called out. On the performance front, Slide is very slow due > to the very generic architecture. So you will do well to > evaluate exactly what kind of performance you expect. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrey Shulinsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Slide Users Mailing List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 3:47 PM > Subject: RE: Using the slide api directly vs. using the webdav client > > > > Nick, > > > > first of all, as Kiran has already said, performance should > be better. > > Then, getting rid of one extra layer that you might not > need should make > > your app more robust. Webdav client has its fair share of > bugs, afaik. > > Finally, slide core api is more handy. It's just my > opinion, of course, > and > > I'm not well familiar with the client. > > > > Yours sincerely, > > Andrey. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Slide Users Mailing List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 3:13 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Using the slide api directly vs. using the > webdav client > > > Importance: Low > > > > > > Andrey > > > > > > That's very interesting to hear. I had been intending to do > > > all my work with the slide api, as opposed to the webdav api. > > > So, for creating structure ("folders", users, adding > > > documents) I can use the server api, but for checking out and > > > versioning documents, I will have to use the webdav api. > > > > > > Do you see any inherent advantage beyond this to using one > > > api over the other ? (ie, webdav vs. server api) > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Andrey Shulinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 2:08 PM > > > To: 'Slide Users Mailing List' > > > Subject: RE: Using the slide api directly vs. using the > webdav client > > > > > > You are welcome. If you have more specific questions about > > > slide "core" > > > api, > > > don't hesitate to ask. Just keep in mind that currently it is > > > somewhat flawed - for instance, some important parts of > > > versioning and binding mechanism are implemented in slide's > > > "webdav" layer only. > > > > > > Yours sincerely, > > > Andrey. > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
