dotnet remoting:
If I understand what you are asking, I do something similar. I register both
objects in the service first. Then on both of them, I call
Activator.GetObject referencing the location of the service, i.e., localhost
and the proper port as well as the object name. I then store the interfaces
in the service. Once you have the interface, I suppose that you could have a
method on one of the objects that takes the interface pointer to the object
you want to access and stores it in a member variable of the class that you
want to call that interface. As I see it, there is no reason why that won't
work.
[quoted text, click to view] "Striped" wrote:
> Is there a faster way to access a remoting server object hosted under THE
> SAME windows service beside standard way thru creating a proxy using
> Activator.GetObject()?
>
> In other words, there are 2 components, first of them is a singlecall and
> used by the clients and second one is a singleton that shares a resource
> with infinite lifetime and is accessed only by the first component.
>
>
How about:
SingleCall.mMethodCall(ISingleon ISingletonInterfaceServiceInstance,
remaining method parameters...)
[quoted text, click to view] "Striped" wrote:
> Thanks! That will probably work in case if both objects are singletons.
> My case is that one object is singlecall and therefore it cannot save the
> pointer to the other object interface between the client's calls.
>
>
> "Wiyosaya" <Wiyosaya@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:803F55FE-6367-40DA-A2BA-D3072EA0A4FE@microsoft.com...
> > If I understand what you are asking, I do something similar. I register
> > both
> > objects in the service first. Then on both of them, I call
> > Activator.GetObject referencing the location of the service, i.e.,
> > localhost
> > and the proper port as well as the object name. I then store the
> > interfaces
> > in the service. Once you have the interface, I suppose that you could have
> > a
> > method on one of the objects that takes the interface pointer to the
> > object
> > you want to access and stores it in a member variable of the class that
> > you
> > want to call that interface. As I see it, there is no reason why that
> > won't
> > work.
> >
> > "Striped" wrote:
> >
> >> Is there a faster way to access a remoting server object hosted under THE
> >> SAME windows service beside standard way thru creating a proxy using
> >> Activator.GetObject()?
> >>
> >> In other words, there are 2 components, first of them is a singlecall and
> >> used by the clients and second one is a singleton that shares a resource
> >> with infinite lifetime and is accessed only by the first component.
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Thanks! That will probably work in case if both objects are singletons.
My case is that one object is singlecall and therefore it cannot save the
pointer to the other object interface between the client's calls.
[quoted text, click to view] "Wiyosaya" <Wiyosaya@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:803F55FE-6367-40DA-A2BA-D3072EA0A4FE@microsoft.com...
> If I understand what you are asking, I do something similar. I register
> both
> objects in the service first. Then on both of them, I call
> Activator.GetObject referencing the location of the service, i.e.,
> localhost
> and the proper port as well as the object name. I then store the
> interfaces
> in the service. Once you have the interface, I suppose that you could have
> a
> method on one of the objects that takes the interface pointer to the
> object
> you want to access and stores it in a member variable of the class that
> you
> want to call that interface. As I see it, there is no reason why that
> won't
> work.
>
> "Striped" wrote:
>
>> Is there a faster way to access a remoting server object hosted under THE
>> SAME windows service beside standard way thru creating a proxy using
>> Activator.GetObject()?
>>
>> In other words, there are 2 components, first of them is a singlecall and
>> used by the clients and second one is a singleton that shares a resource
>> with infinite lifetime and is accessed only by the first component.
>>
>>
>>
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
