Issue 1938: Interposition and Synchronizations in the OTS (ots-rtf) Source: BROKAT Informationssysteme (Mr. Blake Biesecker, ) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Summary: In the OTS interposition can be used to prevent multiple resource registrations across an address space: the server registers a subordinate coordinator with the real parent, and resources registered at the server can register with the subordinate coordinator. This subordinate is driven through prepare/commit/rollback by the parent, and then drives its locally registered resources. However, there is no equivalent for synchronizations, i.e., there"s no subordinate synchronization. Resolution: This issue has been closed without action. See the the discussion section for an explanation. Revised Text: Actions taken: September 8, 1998: received issue January 16, 2001: closed issue Discussion: This issue is addressed on page 10-61 of the specification, under the heading of Subordinate Coordinator Synchronization. Since it occurs right after the description of interposition, this is sufficient to address the original issue that was raised. End of Annotations:===== Return-Path: Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 14:19:53 +0100 From: Mark Little To: issues@omg.org, Mark Little Subject: interposition and synchronizations in the OTS In the OTS interposition can be used to prevent multiple resource registrations across an address space: the server registers a subordinate coordinator with the real parent, and resources registered at the server can register with the subordinate coordinator. This subordinate is driven through prepare/commit/rollback by the parent, and then drives its locally registered resources. However, there is no equivalent for synchronizations, i.e., there's no subordinate synchronization. So, if a server which is using interposition attempts to register a synchronization it will require a cross-address space call (or could simply be disallowed by the implementation); if it is registered locally (with the subordinate coordinator) then it can never be called, since it must be invoked prior to prepare, and the subordinate is called during prepare. Could the text on interposition be modified to include a few lines on "subordinate synchronizations"? Mark. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SENDER : Dr. Mark Little, Arjuna Project, Distributed Systems Research. PHONE : +44 191 222 8066, FAX : +44 191 222 8232 POST : Department of Computing Science, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, NE1 7RU EMAIL : M.C.Little@newcastle.ac.uk From: "Mark Little" To: "Blake Biesecker" Cc: "OTS Revision Task Force" References: <05d901bf4c62$3a443dc0$6e96f080@ncl.ac.uk> <20000208141544.A341@gemstone.com> Subject: Issue 1938 Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:36:44 -0000 Organization: Newcastle University MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-UIDL: Ck?e9]I>e9_e@e9^&?e9 ----- Original Message ----- > Issue 1938 > This issue is addressed in the OTS spec. on page 65. Mark Little > will right up a resolution for this issue. This issue is addressed on page 10-61 of the specification, under the heading of Subordinate Coordinator Synchronization. Since it occurs right after the description of interposition, this is sufficient to address the original issue I raised. Mark. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SENDER : Dr. Mark Little, Arjuna Project, Distributed Systems Research. PHONE : +44 191 222 8066, FAX : +44 191 222 8232 POST : Department of Computing Science, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, NE1 7RU EMAIL : M.C.Little@newcastle.ac.uk