Re: interposition requirements

[Mark Little <mcl@arjuna.com>]

<<<<
Good point. We (the coordinator) just does not know what kind of infrastructure is behind the participants... it might or not be a good wish to have a flat transaction from the performance point of view.
>>>>

 

Exactly. It may want flat, but it can't rely upon it.

<<<<
I think the flat transaction structure might be a wish (for what ever reason) of the coordinator site and it is ok to pass this information in the context to the participants and let the participants decide on this wish. Thus if coordinator wishes a flat transaction hierarchy it will get as much as the participants obey it. We all agree that the direct participants will always be registered with the coordinator, and it is really these participants that the coordinator knows.
>>>>

I think that even if the participant can support flat (and lets face it, all of them will), if it supports interposition and the service has been (locally) configured accordingly, it should be able to ignore flatness. The initiator only has a small part of the whole picture and can't/shouldn't look into my (as an implementer) domain and tell me what kind of protocol to allow.

 

Mark.

 

----------------------------------------------
Dr. Mark Little (mark@arjuna.com)
Transactions Architect, HP Arjuna Labs
Phone +44 191 2064538
Fax   +44 191 2064203