Hello Bill, > > From: Francisco Reverbel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] ... > > Must embed the container's JMX name into my IORs and route IIOP > > invocations through the MBean server. This has been in my todo > > list for quite a while... > > > > Is this portable? Can other orbs just ignore the extra JMX name. I can't > remember whether or not you can stuff anything you like in the IOR contexts.
Yes, it is fully portable. I will not use an IOR context, will use the IOR object id instead. Every IOR has an "object id" field interpreted only by the server that created the IOR. Nobody else looks at it. A server can put whatever it wants into the object id field of the IORs it creates. > Another thing sort of related....I haven't been in the CORBA space for > over...But how's the fault-tolerance spec progressing? Can you stuff > multiple endpoints into 1 IOR for failover? Do other orbs recognize this? Yes, the spec allows you to stuff multiple endpoints within one IOR. If I remember correctly, it introduces the concepts of "object group" and "group IOR". But I do not know of any ORBs have implemented this feature in a spec-compliant way. Maybe it is just my ignorance, I am not following this issue very closely. Changing subject a little bit... Have you clustering guys thought about clustering and IIOP? Seems to be a very good match. I believe IIOP runs a bit faster than JRMP for remote invocations. (For local invocations, JBoss optimized calls are unbeatable.) And you could use the IIOP "location forward" mechanism to do load balancing at the IIOP level. You can send a "location forward" reply to an IIOP client at any time. The client will transparently continue its work using the new location. Best, Francisco _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
