In other words, what you're saying is that people implement the desired COM+
interfaces in a DCOM server, set them up to be REGCLS_SINGLEUSE, then write
the COM+ interfaces to call the DCOM version. Is this correct?

Thanks,
Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Swartz [mailto:steveswMICROSOFT.COM]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 3:14 PM
To: DCOMDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Subject: Re: COM+ and REGCLS_SINGLUSE [is it possible?]

In Windows XP and Windows .NET Server, you can do this by setting the
"application pool" to a huge number. That will effectively force each
instance into its own process (so long as you don't try to start more
instances than the size of the application pool).

In Windows 2000, I've seen people do this by writing a SINGLEUSE COM
component than hands back COM+ components implemented in the COM
component's process. It's a little roundabout, but it works.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Users Guide http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/essentials/mail.asp
contains important info. Save time, search the archives at
http://discuss.microsoft.com/archives/index.html .
To unsubscribe, mailto:DCOM-signoff-requestDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM

----------------------------------------------------------------
Users Guide http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/essentials/mail.asp
contains important info. Save time, search the archives at
http://discuss.microsoft.com/archives/index.html .
To unsubscribe, mailto:DCOM-signoff-requestDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]