[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Anders W. Tell" <anderst@toolsmiths.se>
- To: Miles Sabin <msabin@cromwellmedia.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 16:43:49 +0100
Miles Sabin wrote:
> The critical issue for any RPC mechanism whatsoever (SOAP,
> IIOP, RMI, DCOM etc.) is that, unlike local calls, remote calls
> can fail. That means there'll always be a conflict between
> transparency (making remote calls look like local calls) and
> recoverability (dealing with network failures *as* network
> failures rather than as failures at the application-level).
>
> FWIW I don't think anybody knows how to address this problem
> yet ... tho' some of the things that the Aspect Oriented
> Programming people are doing look promising. SOAP, to it's
> credit, doesn't seem to be pushing too hard in the transparency
> direction ... I think that's probably the right choice.
Have a look my short XIOP paper
<http://xiop.sourceforge.net/doc/xioprationale_1_2.html#ByScale>
for few ideas on the subject, of course within the Corba framework.
IMHO all object interactions should be first class considerations for any
developer,
i.e.. failures in interactions
(inprocess,inter-thread,inter-process,inter-machine)
should be separated from other types of exceptions. In other words I don't
want complete transparency.
Regards
/anders
--
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
/ Financial Toolsmiths AB /
/ Anders W. Tell /
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|