Lew wrote:

>>>> Let me ask you, in hopes that you'll answer this question at least, in inverse

>>>> proportion of what to what?
gk wrote:

>>> What to What ? well ok..what I meant was if I increase the Tiers say

>>> 1 Tier, 2 Tier , 3 Tier likewise does the manageability of the system

>>> decreases ?
Lew wrote:

>> That's what I thought you meant, and the question I answered.
As a reminder, the answer was "no".

gk wrote:

> No. You are wrong. You are thinking as a direct relationship. But I
You said "inverse proportion" and "increase the [number of} tiers", which

denotes "decreases reliability", which is also exactly what you said in the

post you yourself quoted: "manageability of the system decreases". Inverse

relationship is when the movement is in the opposite direction - one

increases, the other decreases.

> meant the other way. You know INDIRECTLY, when you increase the

> Tiers , the Scalability increases (modular nature) . So, my question
That is direct relationship: increase leads to increase. Inverse is when

increase leads to decrease, i.e., the movement is in the opposite (inverse)

direction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_relationship
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_relationship
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_proportion
It's also the exact opposite of what you said just above: "manageability ...

decreases".

> stands this way , when you increase Tiers , does the Scalability and

> manageability are in inverse proportion ?

>

> Hopefully, you got the picture now. Let me know if you still have

> doubt.
I answered that question already, when I said, "Not necessarily, but maybe,"

and, "Scalability and manageability are not related to how many tiers there

are but how well those tiers are engineered and how they connect to one

another and how encapsulated they are from one another." Patricia Shanahan

made the same point, as you might recall, "It depends."

In other words, there is neither a direct nor an indirect relationship. Let

me know if you still have doubt.

--

Lew

Ceci n'est pas une pipe.