• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Remote Data (factory or just one instance?)

 
Nate Johnson
Ranch Hand
Posts: 301
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I have a RemoteData object which implents my RemoteDataInterface and extends UnicastRemoteObject (It also has a reference to the db and a reference to my LockManager).
Right now, in my server, I am just making one of these available via RMI to the clients.
Does anyone have an opinion of which would be better... the way I currently have it, or make a factory that is put in the rmi registry, and then make that factory give out new RemoteData objects to clients?
Also, when I just put the one RemoteData in the rmi registry, does that mean that all clients are going through that one object? I am wondering if this will mess up my locking since my LockManager uses a ref to the RemoteData as the client id in my locking hashtable.
Thanks in advance for any advice here.
 
Mark Spritzler
ranger
Sheriff
Posts: 17278
6
IntelliJ IDE Mac Spring
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
or make a factory that is put in the rmi registry, and then make that factory give out new RemoteData objects to clients?

Yes you must make the factory.
Also, when I just put the one RemoteData in the rmi registry, does that mean that all clients are going through that one object?

Yes.
I am wondering if this will mess up my locking since my LockManager uses a ref to the RemoteData as the client id in my locking hashtable.

Yes it will mess it up.
Hope that helps
Mark
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic