"mark.little(a)jboss.com" wrote : However, although I understand why you're doing this reference approach, I'm not convinced it buys you much. The size of an IOR is so large anyway when compared to an Xid, that saving a few bytes is unlikely to make much of a difference on the number of blocks that get written in the log. It's the number of physical disk blocks and not the amount of information, that makes a difference. The difference needs to be measured. An Xid can take up to 128 bytes, but in an IOR it will take up to 256 bytes, due to the encoding of bytes as pairs of ASCII characters that represent hex digits. This looks like a significant increase in the size of IORs, but it may or may not have a significant impact on the performance of marshalling, transaction context propagation, and logging tasks. The impact is more likely to be significant in the case of JBossRemoting, whose URIs are much smaller than IORs and WS-Addressing endpoint references. But it needs to be measured anyway. It appears that we are in agreement that this is a reasonable approach, which has a conceptual advantage (it avoids nesting of globally unique identifiers), but whose practical benefits need to be validated by measurements. Regards, Francisco View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3978296#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...