So - if there are basic problems like that - then I stay clear.
In pre MX days (when COM was core because it was predominantly an MS code base) the problems existed the other way ( i.e. COM to Corba).
We previously had a pre MX system talking COM happily to a report server product. Post MX migration none of that worked and the developers implemented a horrid <cfexecute> solution driving batch files. We are in the process of implmented a report request broker on an ASP machine (talking COM again directly) to: A) get the report server off the CFMX box, B) provide a more asynchronous method for obtaining the reports and C) to allow the richer functionality of the COM interface in an environment that supports it almost natively.
Other peoples experience may differ.
Regards,
Gary
On 6/1/06, Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
What are the symptoms of it being caused by the corba/com bridge?
How can this be identified exactly?
On 6/1/06, Gary Menzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> *IF* the problem is in the Corba/COM bridge - then writing it in Java
> wouldn't help much.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
> On 6/1/06, Duncan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
>
> 10 machines - yes afraid so, 2 cf 5, 1 x cf7, 7 x cf 6.1
>
> The COM object connects to an AI server - www.burning-glass.com
>
> It all works very reliably in 6.1 and we have no problems at all.
>
> I have looked at DCOM and am having some serious issues getting it
> going - has anyone done this / have some instructions on how to do it?
>
> I was also just looking at trying to write a java wrapper to do the
> connection and expose the methods - any thoughts on if this would
> work?
>
> Thanks
>
> Duncan
>
> On 6/1/06, darryl lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Further to this, the COM object itself must be registered to accept
> > remote calls, via DCOM I think.
> >
> > On 6/1/06, Gary Menzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [ABN AMRO Morgans run 6 load balanced machines (but through a hardware
> load
> > > balancer).]
> > >
> > > With regard to the original question of running COM (in any shape or
> form)
> > > on CF7 (or even CF6 for that matter)...... we have found that since the
> move
> > > to Java (in the first instance in CF6) that not all COM continues to
> work -
> > > basically (I have been told) because of the CORBA-COM bridging.
> > >
> > > So - I guess this might have something to do with why it works even less
> > > reliably in CF7.
> > >
> > > What is the purpose of the COM object that makes it so server
> intensive?
> > > Have you considered an alternative approach to achieve the same result?
> > > Possibly using some of the new Asynchronous mechanisms in CF7?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Gary Menzel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 6/1/06, Patrick Branley < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > We need this because we run 10 load
> > > > > balanced CF machines,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > what the ? thats huge!
> > > >
> > > > the biggest ive heard about in aus is 4 machines ? anyone running
> any
> > > bigger installs than that ?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 6/1/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > We are looking to make the move to CF7.1 from 6.1 and the following
> > > > > code is proving to be a problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > <cfobject action="" context="REMOTE" server=" 192.168.0.101"
> > > > > type="COM" name="talker"
> > > class={C89B6335-B690-11D5-8A14-00D0B790C084}>
> > > > >
> > > > > In 6.1 CF connects to the com correctly on the other machine and we
> are
> > > > > able to carry out the actions. We need this because we run 10 load
> > > > > balanced CF machines, and the COM program is quite heavy so we cant
> > > > > install it on all the machines.
> > > > >
> > > > > On running this code on a cf 7 box I get the folowing:
> > > > >
> > > > > An exception occurred when instantiating a Com object.
> > > > > The cause of this exception was that: AutomationException:
> 0x80040154 -
> > > > > Class not registered.
> > > > >
> > > > > The error occurred in C:\inetpub\wwwroot\testai.cfm: line 2
> > > > >
> > > > > 1 :
> > > > > 2 : <cfobject action="" context="REMOTE" server="
> 192.168.0.101 "
> > > > > type="COM" name="talker"
> > > class={C89B6335-B690-11D5-8A14-00D0B790C084}>
> > > > > 3 :
> > > > >
> > > > > Why does this work in 6 and not in 7?
> > > > >
> > > > > Any healp GREATLY appreciated
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Duncan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Duncan I Loxton
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> >
>
>
--
Duncan I Loxton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
- [cfaussie] Re: calling COM on a remote server. Gary Menzel
