Object with [AutoComplete] methods are deactivated immediately after call to
those methods (regardless IDisposable). But if pooling is enabled, object
simply returns to pool (and continues using resources). Dispose() call
do that (for ServerActivated)). Try this: apply AutoComplete attribute but
"Mehdi Mirzaie" <MehdiMirzaie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9108A4D9-2579-4DD7-80FA-2C175E3B7C27@microsoft.com...
> Hi there
> COM+ Objects ( Server Activation [ server context ]) will be terminated (
> Disposed) when u call Dipose method explicitly for them , but i can use
> activation-deactivation technique with AutoComplete attribute to
> deactivate
> them ( AutoComplete attribute is usually used for transactional objects
> methods , here is an exception) but it is not enough for me , because
> objects
> are alive , and use resources.
> Application Pooling and Recycling are new for Win2003 and XP and they are
> for COM+ Applications not COM+ Objects .
> i dont know why Remoting dont call Dispose method implicitly for these
> objects , but it calls dipose methods for other types objects. :(
> if it doesnt work correclty (Remoting Singleton with Enterprise Services
> for
> disposing) i have to write a wrapper class for my Com+ Objects to call
> dispose method explicitly after each method call like an Interceptor
> Filter .
>
>
> "Sam Santiago" wrote:
>
>> COM+ is most likely controlling the lifetime of your object. Does the
>> object ever terminate? Checkout the Advanced and Pooling and Recycling
>> tabs on the properties of your COM+ application.
>>
>> You might also want to check out this article:
>>
>> ..NET Remoting Architectural Assessment
>>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dndotnet/html/dotnetremotearch.asp
>>
>> Here's an excerpt:
>>
>> "Building COM+ integration directly on top of Remoting is certainly
>> possible, then, and does offer the obvious benefits provided by
>> Enterprise Services-for example, object pooling, distributed transaction
>> support, and role-based security. Missing, though, are good examples of
>> how to do this and how such an approach stacks up architecturally with
>> respect to future proofing. It would be reasonable to expect that the
>> COM+ context infrastructure and the Remoting context infrastructure will
>> come closer together over time. Precisely when or how this will happen is
>> unclear at this stage."
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Sam
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________
>> Sam Santiago
>> ssantiago@n0spam-SoftiTechture.com
>>
http://www.SoftiTechture.com >> _______________________________
>> "Mehdi Mirzaie" <MehdiMirzaie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:D9176D6D-A8E3-402B-A47C-66AC6AA072EA@microsoft.com...
>> > Hi ,
>> > Remoting automatically call Dispose method for disposable
>> > wellknown-single
>> > call objects . But when our objects are COM+ objects in a Server
>> > Application
>> > Activation type it does not work correctly .in other word, after each
>> > method
>> > call from Remote Client Remoting in Remote Host Process doesn't
>> > dispose our
>> > com+ objects.
>> > What is the problem ?
>> >