![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What about the history of client server and how the meaning has changed ?
nice PriashSss ( talk) 13:48, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, sure it is. RickScott 20:14, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
The initial definition ("Client/server is network architecture which separates the client from the server") is lousy. This is tountamount to saying that a c/s architecture is an architecture that involves a client and a server, which is not saying much... B. Oct 13, 2006.
In the tiered section - "1.It puts a greater load on the network." Can someone please expand on this?
Also, when explaining 3 or n-tiered set-ups, I'm actually trying to just clarify that this can be on the same physical hardware, or can be on different server hardware, and also I think this entire page just needs lots of clarification, and isn't very good at explaining the whole idea very well at all...
The second part of this paragraph doesn't make sense to me. The server is more flexible: If the server wants to update, then what?
Somebody may fix this as I don't know what this should say :-S -- Lazer erazer 15:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
any one who got ans for what purpose / is used in client/server...is it just for simplicity of writing or got any significant meaning? if it got plz those who got ans...tell it... or mail me at deepu_kkl@yahoo.co.in thank you âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.212.194.193 ( talk) 15:16, August 23, 2007 (UTC)
1) what is use of multitire Architectures ?and how it works.
2) what is difference between multitire Architectures and three tire Architectures.
This article is an important concept, yet is is currently barely better than an stub. The lead needs to be clarified and rewritten to be more concise. The lead is also bloated with examples that ought to be the moved and improved under a new heading. Comparison with other kinds of architectures seemss appropriate to me but needs elaboration and citations.
Also, the current article only applies the term client-server to networking situations. While this is certainly the most common meaning, I frequently see "client-server" used among computer programmers in a more general sense to divide any system into the client components that want data or services and the server components that offer data and services regardless of whether the data is transmitted over a network or not. But my experience with this as a programmer is mostly anecdotal and I'm unsure if this alternate meaning is just a loose usage of the term for an analogous but different concept or if the more generalize concept is a more proper definition of client-server for which networking situations are just the most popular example.
I'll do my best to start a facelift for this article. Help appreciated. Voteformike ( talk) 03:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion: if there is a standard form with either a hyphen or slash joining the terms "client" and "server", it should be used throughout. If there is no known standard, at least choose one and apply consistently. Both forms are used at different points in the article, as well as some that capitalise both terms. -- ozNoz ( talk) 21:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
In "Characteristics of Server" section it is written that servers never initiates requests or activities. While in line no. 8-9 of second para from start, is given an example of a server application forwarding request of its client program to another client program. Could anybody explain this?
The article switches sloppily between "client-server" and "client/server". Assuming that the title of the article was given more careful thought than the body--and perhaps some of the body has been contributed by people other than whoever it was who first wrote the title--I guess the hyphenated spelling should be adopted throughout. âPreceding unsigned comment added by AndrewWarden ( talk ⢠contribs) 10:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
As is, the current Advantages and Disadvantages sections are pretty POV and unnecessary. Since virtually all of the items on the lists compare the client-server model to the peer-to-peer model, I think the sections should be merged into a "Comparison with peer-to-peer" section. Thoughts? â Fatal Error 03:47, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
This section could use some serious help. Right now "Increases productivity" and "Developer productivity" are listed as advantages. I'm removing these until someone can put an actual explanation for these. âPreceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.254.33 ( talk) 03:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
From a developers view the relationship between client and servers are very simple.
The server have a "listen" function, were it sits and waits for incomming connections The client have a "connect" function in witch it make a connection to the server.
After the connection is established the to parties are *completly* symetrical. And this is important! Anyone can initiate a request to the other. No one have "priority". Normal though is that one of the parties have more "responsibility".
Mutch of other client/server wording is marketing foo. Servier=mutch money vs Clients=not so expensive.... âPreceding unsigned comment added by 195.66.94.4 ( talk) 16:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
User M added a merge proposal for this article to network architecture, which I removed. This is grossly incorrect. The client server model obviously has nothing to do with the architecture of a network, but is a model for Application Layer service delivery. Kbrose ( talk) 20:02, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Should this be "Clientâserver model" instead of "Clientâserver architecture"? Or "Clientâserver [some other noun]"? Stephan Leeds ( talk) 02:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
"Both clientâserver and peer-to-peer architectures are in wide usage today. Details may be found in Comparison of Centralized (Client-Server) and Decentralized (Peer-to-Peer) Networking.", I'm not personalty very knowledgeable of wiki standers but this dosn't even seem to pass the smell test as I ascertain from my consumption of Wikipedia articles.-- 99.147.132.33 ( talk) 16:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)Forrest
The reference to "Peer to Peer vs. Client/Server Networks" needs improvement, it is unclear and unfounded what the author was referencing. A simple search on Google for that term gives articles about home network configurations. While it is true that these can be set up to either use a server, or simply remain "peer-to-peer" (ad-hoc?) for many given services, their scale doesn't compare to P2P networks such as the now-closed Gnutella. Scalability is considered a big benefit to P2P over C/S, so I personally doubt that using a home network with five systems is doing it justice.
Maybe the author meant to reference a specific article that compares more than mere home networks. In any case the citation gives almost no clues at all about what article they meant. 143.205.122.72 ( talk) 11:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
The bind disambiguation page includes:
and links to this page, but the word "bind" does not appear in this page.
72.5.239.5 ( talk) 20:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Model of system in clientâs mind? i want Briefly learn can tell me about Model of system in clientâs mind? â Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.69.11.236 ( talk) 18:18, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
wide overlap. fgnievinski ( talk) 03:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC) fgnievinski ( talk) 03:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
My understanding of the en dash is that it does not apply here and this article title (and the whole body) should use a hyphen. Please advise. PurpleQuaver ( talk) 12:06, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
What is a client, what is a server. It could be a node, but from the texts, I'm not sure it is the (most) accurate umbrella for both. Worth finding out and putting it somewhere in the article(s)? Alien4 ( talk) 13:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What about the history of client server and how the meaning has changed ?
nice PriashSss ( talk) 13:48, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, sure it is. RickScott 20:14, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
The initial definition ("Client/server is network architecture which separates the client from the server") is lousy. This is tountamount to saying that a c/s architecture is an architecture that involves a client and a server, which is not saying much... B. Oct 13, 2006.
In the tiered section - "1.It puts a greater load on the network." Can someone please expand on this?
Also, when explaining 3 or n-tiered set-ups, I'm actually trying to just clarify that this can be on the same physical hardware, or can be on different server hardware, and also I think this entire page just needs lots of clarification, and isn't very good at explaining the whole idea very well at all...
The second part of this paragraph doesn't make sense to me. The server is more flexible: If the server wants to update, then what?
Somebody may fix this as I don't know what this should say :-S -- Lazer erazer 15:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
any one who got ans for what purpose / is used in client/server...is it just for simplicity of writing or got any significant meaning? if it got plz those who got ans...tell it... or mail me at deepu_kkl@yahoo.co.in thank you âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.212.194.193 ( talk) 15:16, August 23, 2007 (UTC)
1) what is use of multitire Architectures ?and how it works.
2) what is difference between multitire Architectures and three tire Architectures.
This article is an important concept, yet is is currently barely better than an stub. The lead needs to be clarified and rewritten to be more concise. The lead is also bloated with examples that ought to be the moved and improved under a new heading. Comparison with other kinds of architectures seemss appropriate to me but needs elaboration and citations.
Also, the current article only applies the term client-server to networking situations. While this is certainly the most common meaning, I frequently see "client-server" used among computer programmers in a more general sense to divide any system into the client components that want data or services and the server components that offer data and services regardless of whether the data is transmitted over a network or not. But my experience with this as a programmer is mostly anecdotal and I'm unsure if this alternate meaning is just a loose usage of the term for an analogous but different concept or if the more generalize concept is a more proper definition of client-server for which networking situations are just the most popular example.
I'll do my best to start a facelift for this article. Help appreciated. Voteformike ( talk) 03:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion: if there is a standard form with either a hyphen or slash joining the terms "client" and "server", it should be used throughout. If there is no known standard, at least choose one and apply consistently. Both forms are used at different points in the article, as well as some that capitalise both terms. -- ozNoz ( talk) 21:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
In "Characteristics of Server" section it is written that servers never initiates requests or activities. While in line no. 8-9 of second para from start, is given an example of a server application forwarding request of its client program to another client program. Could anybody explain this?
The article switches sloppily between "client-server" and "client/server". Assuming that the title of the article was given more careful thought than the body--and perhaps some of the body has been contributed by people other than whoever it was who first wrote the title--I guess the hyphenated spelling should be adopted throughout. âPreceding unsigned comment added by AndrewWarden ( talk ⢠contribs) 10:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
As is, the current Advantages and Disadvantages sections are pretty POV and unnecessary. Since virtually all of the items on the lists compare the client-server model to the peer-to-peer model, I think the sections should be merged into a "Comparison with peer-to-peer" section. Thoughts? â Fatal Error 03:47, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
This section could use some serious help. Right now "Increases productivity" and "Developer productivity" are listed as advantages. I'm removing these until someone can put an actual explanation for these. âPreceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.254.33 ( talk) 03:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
From a developers view the relationship between client and servers are very simple.
The server have a "listen" function, were it sits and waits for incomming connections The client have a "connect" function in witch it make a connection to the server.
After the connection is established the to parties are *completly* symetrical. And this is important! Anyone can initiate a request to the other. No one have "priority". Normal though is that one of the parties have more "responsibility".
Mutch of other client/server wording is marketing foo. Servier=mutch money vs Clients=not so expensive.... âPreceding unsigned comment added by 195.66.94.4 ( talk) 16:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
User M added a merge proposal for this article to network architecture, which I removed. This is grossly incorrect. The client server model obviously has nothing to do with the architecture of a network, but is a model for Application Layer service delivery. Kbrose ( talk) 20:02, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Should this be "Clientâserver model" instead of "Clientâserver architecture"? Or "Clientâserver [some other noun]"? Stephan Leeds ( talk) 02:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
"Both clientâserver and peer-to-peer architectures are in wide usage today. Details may be found in Comparison of Centralized (Client-Server) and Decentralized (Peer-to-Peer) Networking.", I'm not personalty very knowledgeable of wiki standers but this dosn't even seem to pass the smell test as I ascertain from my consumption of Wikipedia articles.-- 99.147.132.33 ( talk) 16:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)Forrest
The reference to "Peer to Peer vs. Client/Server Networks" needs improvement, it is unclear and unfounded what the author was referencing. A simple search on Google for that term gives articles about home network configurations. While it is true that these can be set up to either use a server, or simply remain "peer-to-peer" (ad-hoc?) for many given services, their scale doesn't compare to P2P networks such as the now-closed Gnutella. Scalability is considered a big benefit to P2P over C/S, so I personally doubt that using a home network with five systems is doing it justice.
Maybe the author meant to reference a specific article that compares more than mere home networks. In any case the citation gives almost no clues at all about what article they meant. 143.205.122.72 ( talk) 11:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
The bind disambiguation page includes:
and links to this page, but the word "bind" does not appear in this page.
72.5.239.5 ( talk) 20:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Model of system in clientâs mind? i want Briefly learn can tell me about Model of system in clientâs mind? â Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.69.11.236 ( talk) 18:18, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
wide overlap. fgnievinski ( talk) 03:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC) fgnievinski ( talk) 03:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
My understanding of the en dash is that it does not apply here and this article title (and the whole body) should use a hyphen. Please advise. PurpleQuaver ( talk) 12:06, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
What is a client, what is a server. It could be a node, but from the texts, I'm not sure it is the (most) accurate umbrella for both. Worth finding out and putting it somewhere in the article(s)? Alien4 ( talk) 13:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)