It's not just a problem about code. Check those entity-relationship models and compare to transactions. You can also dig a lot of "gold" in there. No wonder the code follows the same standards. But I agree, the availability of ever growing resources is a good case for poorly wrritten (and benchmarked) code. J

About Jeremy's comment (and apologies for mistakes in my english). I cannot figure out why a network service like NFS is limited to a Gig link in yr.2010. In fact, one of the advantages of using Ethernet infrastructure is you actually can use facilities and features based on a common and extensively known environment like networks. If you can team network links in ESX servers trunk switch ports and use vifs on the FAS, why should anyone be limited to 1Gig speed?. Maybe I got something wrong here. Cheers Juan

Thanks for your comment, Adriaan. I definately agree on the different vendor issue, this reflect many ways to solve different issues, thus permitting evolution. This moves us forward. I must state, in many aspects, I have enjoyed DOT. And I still enjoy it ;) But my criticism comes as an answer to a precise statement "...not so dependent on tiers...". Under my point of view, this doesn't reflect a real situation, so I believe is a misleading comment. Tiering, as I stated, is a feature. And in many cases is a strategy (when you decide to use that feature as a policy mainstream). Allright, use it just if you need it. That's all it takes. But, honestly, I do not believe this can be called dependency. Cheers