nhuanvn
asked on
RMI and concurrency issue
Hello Experts,
I am dealing with RMI, writing some code using it.
They work fine for clients sequentially, but I wonder
if I can make this code run concurrently to serve
clients. As I realize, 1 remote object can serve
the requests sequentially, but I don't see how to
deal with concurrency.
Could you please direct me how to deal with concurrency
when using RMI ?
Much more points and grade A will be my very thanks to
you.
I am dealing with RMI, writing some code using it.
They work fine for clients sequentially, but I wonder
if I can make this code run concurrently to serve
clients. As I realize, 1 remote object can serve
the requests sequentially, but I don't see how to
deal with concurrency.
Could you please direct me how to deal with concurrency
when using RMI ?
Much more points and grade A will be my very thanks to
you.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I've made a test to see if the clients run concurrently,
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
ASKER
I've made a test to see if the clients run concurrently,
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
ASKER
I've made a test to see if the clients run concurrently,
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
ASKER
I've made a test to see if the clients run concurrently,
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
ASKER
I've made a test to see if the clients run concurrently,
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
ASKER
I've made a test to see if the clients run concurrently,
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)
I'm glad to help you :)
Mmmm... do you accept the answer?
ASKER
Of course I do, but there's a problem with
the Java stub from Experts-exchange that I can't submit
mine. This is another trial.
the Java stub from Experts-exchange that I can't submit
mine. This is another trial.
ASKER
and they do. So it is the right answer that we don't HAVE
TO do anything, not that we CAN DO NOTHING.
Thank you for your tip on the Collections.
Cheer !
:-)