[Gnumed-devel] re: storage mechanism dependence.

[sjtan]

> > I'm not sure what the advantages of
> > > xml-rpc are.
> >    
> It is more lightweight.
I think it's a lot slower too; a client would probably have to be 
pipelined and make asynchronous calls to xml-rpc if the rpc interface 
retrieves too small bits of data, if it wants a reasonable response time.
 You also won't know as a client that
a usage of an interface has the wrong syntax until a call is made, as
opposed to a failure to compile if a client side stub is compiled.

> If data-aware is just a more appealing phrase for
> storage-mechanism-dependant I am not particularly thrilled.
Does SQL rule?
LDAP is the only current storage alternative to sql discussed , and it 
might already have a sql interface;  there's a lot more 
storage-mechanism dependance AND  implementation-dependance in
the current code by using postgresql triggers and pgsql language module.