Issue 2356:  Poller may only be used in ORB that created it (messaging-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature:  Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: Summary:  The non-persistent Poller valuetype may not be passed
 from the originating client to some other client.  Only
 Persistent Poller valuetypes may be used in this way.
 

Resolution: clarified
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
January 29, 1999: received issue
January 9, 2001: closed issue
Discussion: 
This is pretty clear already, but to further clarify, add the following words in section 1.3.6 of the output of Messaging 1.2 RTF at the end of the second sentence  : 

A basic generated Poller cannot be used outside the client that invoked the sendp_ operation which resulted in its creation. 

End of Annotations:=====
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:45:02 -0800
From: "Jon Goldberg" <jgoldberg@inprise.com>
Reply-To: goldberg@inprise.com
X-Accept-Language: en
To: messaging-rtf@omg.org
CC: issues@omg.org
Subject: Issue:  Poller may only be used in ORB that created it

Issue:  The non-persistent Poller valuetype may not be passed
from the originating client to some other client.  Only
Persistent Poller valuetypes may be used in this way.

Proposed resolution:  This point needs to be made 
explicitly in the specification.  The regular Poller
(created by a sendp_ call when no routing is enabled)
is a valuetype but is not usable outside the process
in which it was created.  The purpose of the Poller
is to allow a pure client to use asynchronous stubs.
If that same poller were required to be usable outside
the originating client, it would need to encapsulate
an object reference in some way (like the Persistent
Poller) and this would force that client to contain
an Object Adapter (thus defeating the intent of
enabling pure clients to use the asynch stubs).  
A statement to this effect needs to be added to 
section 6.6 which introduces the generic poller.

From: Bill Binko <Bill.Binko@trcinc.com>
To: Messaging-Rtf <messaging-rtf@omg.org>
Subject: Discussion Issue 2356: Poller may only be used in ORB that
create
	d it (messaging-rtf)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 12:29:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-UIDL: 5;,e9FJCe9Cc[d9Z/Md9

Do we really want to use the word "client" in this clarification?
Would
"original calling context" or even "process" be more clear?  This one
is
nit-picking, but it reads funny.
 
Binko