CORBA 2.4 MAILINGLIST Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

CORBA24 — Definition of COMPLETED_NO needs to be clarified

  • Key: CORBA24-73
  • Legacy Issue Number: 3302
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: BROKAT Informationssysteme ( Blake Biesecker)
  • Summary:

    In order to resolve the OTS RTF issue 1819, we need
    to have clearer wording regarding what COMPLETED_NO.

    Since we now have the POA, the following phrase from
    section 3.17 is not clear enough:

    COMPLETED_NO The object implementation was never initiated prior to the exception being raised

    In order to get proper rollback logic for transactions
    that get system exceptions and, I'd imagine, to get
    proper fault tolerant behavior, it needs to be made
    clear that COMPLETED_NO means that absolutely no execution
    on the server took place prior to the exception being
    raised. Without such a clarification, it is not possible
    to guarantee data integrity for fault tolerance and it
    forces the OTS to insist on a strict rollback policy when
    a system exception is raised.

    In particular, with the advent of the POA, "object implementation"
    is not as clear as it once was. Does this include servant
    locators, for example.

    As a place to start, I'd like to suggest this instead:

    COMPLETED_NO No execution was initiated in the server prior to the exception being raised

    (The archive for issue 1819 contains a lot more
    discussion on this topic as it relates to the
    OTS.)

  • Reported: CORBA 2.3.1 — Tue, 8 Feb 2000 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Close no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT