[jboss-dev-forums] [JBoss Transactions Development] - Re: Remote txinflow: XID changes
David Lloyd [http://community.jboss.org/people/dmlloyd] created the discussion
"Re: Remote txinflow: XID changes"
To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/632597#632597
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Halliday wrote:
> From the Remoting perspective, the EIS name would most likely just be the full node
name of the calling node
Nope, it's the name of the target node, not the originating node. If you have one
parent server talking to two subordinate servers, that's two distinct EIS names,
because the parent has to be able to tell the subordinates apart for recovery purposes,
just as it has to be able to tell apart e.g. the Oracle and MSSQL server dbs it's
talking to through the same mechanism. Which brings up back to the other list the parent
needs to maintain: a set of all the subordinates it's talked to. Well actually
it's the set of all subordantes with outstanding tx, but deleting items from the list
frequently is probably more trouble than its worth.
Ah, you're just looking at
it from the opposite end; however the point still stands that the EIS name is equal to the
node name. If I set up a Remoting connection into the EJB client, the node (and cluster)
name of the remote side is noted for various purposes. This also has the advantage that a
node can be contacted via a different configuration, socket, or protocol and still be
recognized which allows us to port over UserTransaction as well as stateful EJBs to new
connections. It should also help us with this issue.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to this message by going to Community
[http://community.jboss.org/message/632597#632597]
Start a new discussion in JBoss Transactions Development at Community
[http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&...]
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 4.3 KB)