Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>Actually we are talking about distributed DataContexts. So DataObjects are
>not "remoted" in any traditional sense.
>
>
great!
>One of the upcoming 1.2 features is nested DataContexts in the same VM. So
>a "child" DataContext can commit to a "parent" without committing all the
>way to DB. This is ideal for things like dialogs and multistep web
>screens.
>
>"Distributed" DataContext will likely be implemented as an extension of
>"nested" DataContexts feature with remote parent. Communication between
>parent and child will be abstracted into a separate layer and will be
>pluggable (I am looking at Hessian for one possible default
>implementation).
>
>
perfect! hessian would have benn my favorite!
>We'll have more discussions on that as we start the actual work.
>
>Andrus
>
>
i have a lot of experience with eodistribution ( positive and negative :-)
i think one very important concept is the existance of an 'application
server' i mean one could easily just tunnel jdbc trough
ssh to implement remote clients otherwise...
one very nice feature ( in eodistribution ) is the possibility to have
code executed on the server...
sometimes it just makes sence to execute on the server, i implemented a
framework that allows observed execution of long running
operations on the server for example.
one other important thing is synchronisation ( notifications ) this is
one thing in eodistribution that often fails...
has work allredy started in some place?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Mar 14 2005 - 11:37:52 EST