>It would be nice to hear from more of the experts since we seem to have divergent views among them. For example, we were both part of a thread a while back with Christof where he said:(message #798250) "The biggest difference is resource usage in this case. An EXE solution needs more memory as the runtime is bigger and there's copy of the runtime for each EXE.
>I think the reasons to pick MTDLLS over EXEs shouldn't be performance considerations, rather stability, scalability, security, etc."

All those things matter and it doesn't really matter whether you use EXE or MTDLL. Resource usage for VFP using EXE isn't any bigger than using DLLs. An Exe loads the runtime, if you use MTDLLs IIS loads that same runtime (multiple times possibly). EXEs servers must load multiple EXEs up front - MTDLLs dynamically load them as needed but you have no control over how many actually get loaded.

Security? Both work through COM security. If you're referring to COM+ - COM+ is just a glorified DCOM server on the security front. Remember the COM+ hosting container is actually an EXE (although you can create InProc containers too but Microsoft doesn't recommend that because the system can't manage DLL servers for health).

What do you know about Scalability Claude, hmm? I've worked on apps that have close to 10 million hits a day and another that was somewhere around 8 million. One was a WWWC app, the other an ASP classic with VFP COM. Both were able to do their thing with room to spare. The key is not to look at raw numbers but to understand the technology and maximize its use for a given platform and not look at it from a one sided view. You can use almost any technology to make it do what you need especially these days - we're not in the stone age anymore when nobody knew how to do this stuff and had to come up with our own ways of doing things before Microsoft figured out that they needed to do something.


+++ Rick ---