If your object three and object four are standard marshaled, and are
configured so that they run in their client's context, they will obtain
synchronization and transactional services from their client's context.

Since you do not pass references to your object three and object four
out from the component that creates them (object two), then you don't
need to worry about synchronization or transactions, since these objects
obtain those services from their caller (that is, if object two is
synchronized, and if object two creates and is the only caller of object
three, then object three is synchronized by definition).

There is no internal sharing of object instances. The only time your
application code runs is when you call it. COM+ occasionally calls
interfaces on your components relevant for the various services (for
pooling or construction, say), but this should not be an issue relative
to synchronization.

The suggestions you have been seeing do not suggest removing the number
of configured components per se. They suggest removing service
configurations that are not necessary from components.

If your threading model on VC++ components is "Both", and if you are
creating them from out of process, then in NT/MTS they would have been
running in the STA, whereas in W2K/COM+ they would be running in the
MTA. If the data access objects you end up using are marked "Apartment",
then the call from your application into the data access layer will be
cross-apartment in W2K, whereas it is within-apartment in NT. This could
be a significant performance problem if you're marshaling lots of data
across the apartment boundary (which is common for data access objects
;)

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Gamble [mailto:Charles.GambleSINGULARITY.CO.UK]
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 2:43 AM
To: DCOMDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Subject: Re: FW: COM+ and Free Threading

Our objects have transactional settings which means that they need
synchronisation on. However, if we could remove the transactional
settings
and turn synchronisation off, would this mean that we have to perform
our
own thread safety mechamisms? We do not have mulithreaded clients and we
don't share object instances between clients/other objects, so would
this be
necessary? Will COM+ internally share object instances in some way if
synchronisation is off, so we are forced to do our own thread safety?
The threading model of our objects is "Both".

----------------------------------------------------------------
Users Guide http://discuss.microsoft.com/archives/mailfaq.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 ]