Remote activation: different results depending on ....
Author: firstname.lastname@example.org (ulrich-merkel)
I open this discussion because there seem to be some issues
one has to know before building an architecture of coherent services
about uniface behaviour executing self-contained services in local and different remote environments.
So I think it would be nice for all members which wants to use remote activations to see how different "userver" settings will influence the result.
Starting from Mike Taylors great article "Remote Activation; what should be expected"
and my observations "Denial of Service: activate MYSERVICE.DO_IT() ..." it is worth to investigate,
how different invocation environments influence the result of some relatively simple implementations.
Please remember: changing invocation is done in the ASN file (outside of the uniface coding one can control).
- Let's start with the implementation from Mike and run it in the remote environment he described.
The result is: “Set in init”
- if we turn off remote execution so all services run locally.
The result is: “Text From CLIENT_FRM”
As Mike mentioned:
"After the newinstance of remote_2 the vales $status and $procerror are 0 and if I were to change my asn file to have my services locally I would get "Text From CLIENT_FRM" returned.... But if I did change the code so that everything was local I would get a negative $status and $procerror returned from the newinstance of REMOTE_2 and I would have to decide whether this was acceptable or not."