Re: GNOME CVS: gnome-core mmclouglin
- From: "Dirk-Jan C. Binnema" <bulkmeel yahoo co uk>
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs noisehavoc org>
- Cc: GNOME Components <gnome-components-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: GNOME CVS: gnome-core mmclouglin
- Date: 02 Dec 2001 13:00:52 +0100
Op zo 02-12-2001, om 10:14 schreef Maciej Stachowiak:
> On 28Nov2001 01:21PM (+0100), Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> >
> > having remote components would be so good for GNOME, that I can't see
> > why there's even a discussion about it :-) As I say, if I have remote
> > components, I can do a lot of nice things for a lot of office
> > environments.
>
> While distributed applications are nice, I don't think the component
> model is necessarily the best layer for solving these kinds of
> problems. An application-specific client-server model using a more
> lightweight protocol like SOAP instead of relying on X and CORBA.
I don't think SOAP is 'more lightweight' than CORBA; quite the contrary;
SOAP requires expensive XML-parsing on both sides, and has a very
inefficient wire-format.
[SOAP does have the advantage of being able to piggyback on http, thus
evading firewalls, and being stateless, which makes distributed
components easier -- see the problems with distributed ref counting and
such...]
> Examples:
>
> * Instead of running your addressbook on your iPAQ displaying to your
> desktop, wouldn't you rather have both your iPAQ and your desktop
> both talk to a network server that manages your addressbook info and
> arbitrates concurrent access?
>
> * Instead of running a load applet on your server and displaying to
> your desktop, why not have a load monitoring system that separates
> the monitoring part, which runs on the server, from the GUI, which
> runs on any other machine and connects at any time (perhaps even from
> multiple machines at once) with suitable authentication credentials?
>
> Anyway, while the idea of remote components is interesting, in
> practice the network is _not_ transparent. It has high latency, it has
> low bandwidth, and it goes down all the time. To get robustness and
> decent performance, you are better off using protocols that can cope
> with this non-idea behavior.
Well, CORBA is one easy way to write network servers...
> GNOME should aim to make it easier to develop networked client-server
> applications instead of relying on heavyweight RPC or remote display
> hacks. Support for SOAP and associated protocols is a step in the
> right direction.
"Regular" CORBA programming (ie. nog-GNOME) is quite a bit easier when
using Bonobo and it's support libraries (such as OAF/BAF), and I've seen
some interest in this area. If only we could use Bonobo for remote
components...
--Dirk-Jan.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dirk-Jan Binnema, djcb djcbsoftware nl, www.djcbsoftware.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------
pgp fp: BB49 41D7 053D E5F1 F333 586E C530 CBC3 4352 A39F
-----------------------------------------------------------
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]