Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

Passing Reference to Stateful Component

3 posts in General Discussion (old) Last posting was on 2000-03-06 18:21:15.0Z
Mark Maslow Posted on 2000-03-01 21:52:28.0Z
Newsgroups: sybase.public.easerver
From: "Mark Maslow" <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org>
Subject: Passing Reference to Stateful Component
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 13:52:28 -0800
Lines: 26
Organization: Sierra Club
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
NNTP-Posting-Host: machine001.sierraclub.org 207.90.163.1
Message-ID: <347_hqCOLl8g$GA.201@forums.sybase.com>
Path: forums-1-dub!forums-1-dub!forums-master.sybase.com!forums.sybase.com
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.easerver:27387
Article PK: 158792

I have an application that currently uses a stateful component bound to a
Java client. I am considering architectures that will provide more control
over the stateful components.

One possibility, I think, would be to have a shared component, written in
Java, that would create and manage stateful components. Clients would call
a method on the shared component to create an instance of a stateful
component, and the shared component would assign a key to the stateful
component reference, store it in a vector and pass back the key to the
client. Then, the client would call methods on the shared component that
would be passed on through to the stateful component identified by the key.

I noticed in a section in the doc that it's possible to serialize component
instance references. Perhaps I could have the shared component return
references to the stateful components directly to the client using
serialization? That would simplify matters somewhat by removing a layer of
abstraction. What kind of overhead is involved in serializing and
de-serializing component references?

Does anyone have any thoughts or relevant experience about this?

TIA

Mark Maslow


Dave Wolf [Sybase] Posted on 2000-03-03 14:15:23.0Z
Newsgroups: sybase.public.easerver
From: "Dave Wolf [Sybase]" <dwolf@sybase.com>
Subject: Re: Passing Reference to Stateful Component
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 09:15:23 -0500
Lines: 42
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
NNTP-Posting-Host: vpn-eme-024.sybase.com 130.214.8.24
Message-ID: <347_sp5g2tRh$GA.201@forums.sybase.com>
References: <347_hqCOLl8g$GA.201@forums.sybase.com>
Path: forums-1-dub!forums-1-dub!forums-master.sybase.com!forums.sybase.com
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.easerver:27232
Article PK: 158141

What issue are you trying to resolve? In essence you are duplicating what
EAS is doing by maintaining your own pool of stateful objects and
dispatching to them. Thats what EAS does and does well.

Dave Wolf
Internet Applications Division

"Mark Maslow" <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org> wrote in message
news:hqCOLl8g$GA.201@forums.sybase.com...
> I have an application that currently uses a stateful component bound to a
> Java client. I am considering architectures that will provide more
control
> over the stateful components.
>
> One possibility, I think, would be to have a shared component, written in
> Java, that would create and manage stateful components. Clients would
call
> a method on the shared component to create an instance of a stateful
> component, and the shared component would assign a key to the stateful
> component reference, store it in a vector and pass back the key to the
> client. Then, the client would call methods on the shared component that
> would be passed on through to the stateful component identified by the
key.
>
> I noticed in a section in the doc that it's possible to serialize
component
> instance references. Perhaps I could have the shared component return
> references to the stateful components directly to the client using
> serialization? That would simplify matters somewhat by removing a layer
of
> abstraction. What kind of overhead is involved in serializing and
> de-serializing component references?
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts or relevant experience about this?
>
> TIA
>
> Mark Maslow
>
>


Mark Maslow Posted on 2000-03-06 18:21:15.0Z
Newsgroups: sybase.public.easerver
From: "Mark Maslow" <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org>
Subject: Re: Passing Reference to Stateful Component
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:21:15 -0800
Lines: 70
Organization: Sierra Club
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
NNTP-Posting-Host: machine001.sierraclub.org 207.90.163.1
Message-ID: <347_JMhdkm5h$GA.285@forums.sybase.com>
References: <347_hqCOLl8g$GA.201@forums.sybase.com> <347_sp5g2tRh$GA.201@forums.sybase.com>
Path: forums-1-dub!forums-1-dub!forums-master.sybase.com!forums.sybase.com
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.easerver:27077
Article PK: 158010

Dave -

The reason that I started thinking along these lines was to get around a
certain Jaguar bug, and certain limitations in Jaguar and Jaguar Manager.
All of which will hopefully be more or less temporary. But let's not go
there. Rather, I will refocus my question.

I see in the Jaguar documentation that you can serialize and deserialize
component instance references. Under what circumstances would this
typically be used? If I am understanding this correctly, a shared component
could create an instance of a stateful component and serialize the proxy and
pass it to a client, thus enabling that client to directly access methods on
the stateful component that was originially instanciated by the shared
component. Is this correct, or am I completely misunderstanding this
mechanism?

TIA for any clarification anyone can offer about this feature.

Mark Maslow

Dave Wolf [Sybase] <dwolf@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:sp5g2tRh$GA.201@forums.sybase.com...
> What issue are you trying to resolve? In essence you are duplicating what
> EAS is doing by maintaining your own pool of stateful objects and
> dispatching to them. Thats what EAS does and does well.
>
> Dave Wolf
> Internet Applications Division
>
> "Mark Maslow" <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org> wrote in message
> news:hqCOLl8g$GA.201@forums.sybase.com...
> > I have an application that currently uses a stateful component bound to
a
> > Java client. I am considering architectures that will provide more
> control
> > over the stateful components.
> >
> > One possibility, I think, would be to have a shared component, written
in
> > Java, that would create and manage stateful components. Clients would
> call
> > a method on the shared component to create an instance of a stateful
> > component, and the shared component would assign a key to the stateful
> > component reference, store it in a vector and pass back the key to the
> > client. Then, the client would call methods on the shared component
that
> > would be passed on through to the stateful component identified by the
> key.
> >
> > I noticed in a section in the doc that it's possible to serialize
> component
> > instance references. Perhaps I could have the shared component return
> > references to the stateful components directly to the client using
> > serialization? That would simplify matters somewhat by removing a layer
> of
> > abstraction. What kind of overhead is involved in serializing and
> > de-serializing component references?
> >
> > Does anyone have any thoughts or relevant experience about this?
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > Mark Maslow
> >
> >
>
>