Post-client/server coordination tools
- 2 Citations
- 115 Downloads
Abstract
The exploitation of new application possibilities, like collaboration and cooperation, offered by distributed systems requires advanced coordination support. Traditional tools are based on the message passing paradigm and lead to asymmetric client/server application architectures. The other - conceptually superior - paradigm uses a virtual shared memory. The development of distributed programs is easier in the latter model and leads to elegant solutions that meet well the new possibilities. We term software support that follows this second approach post-client/server tools. CoKe (Coordination Kernel) is a new middleware layer of this new generation. It particularly eases the development of fault-tolerant, distributed applications.
We discuss, why coordinative data structures (on virtual shared objects) provide more advantages than the traditional method invocation model (on distributed objects).
Keywords
Message Passing Garbage Collection Shared Object Object Oriented Approach Object Request BrokerPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, S. H. Pakzad: A Taxonomy and Current Issues in Multidatabase Systems. IEEE Computer. (1992).Google Scholar
- 2.A. Elmagarmid (ed.): Distributed and Parallel Databases-Special Issue on Software Support for Work Flow Management. Vol. 3, No. 2, (1995).Google Scholar
- 3.A. Elmagarmid, Y. Leu, W. Litwin, M. Rusinkiewicz: A Multidatabase Transaction Model for InterBase. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases. (1990).Google Scholar
- 4.M. R. Eskicioglu: A Comprehensive Bibliography of Distributed Shared Memory. Univerity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada, TR96-17, (1996).Google Scholar
- 5.A. Forst, e. Kühn, H. Pohlai, K. Schwarz: Logic Based and Imperative Coordination Languages. In: Proceedings of the PDCS'94, Seventh International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing Systems. ISCA, IEEE, Las Vegas, Nevada, (1994).Google Scholar
- 6.A. Forst, e. Kühn, O. Bukhres: General Purpose Work Flow Languages. In [2].Google Scholar
- 7.A. Forst, e. Kühn: Implementing Cooperative Software with High-Level Communication Packages. In: Eight IEEE Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, New Orleans, Louisiana, (1996).Google Scholar
- 8.Th. Gschwind, e. Kühn: A Dynamic Replica Reconfiguration Architecture. In: Proceedings of the Euro-PDS Parallel and Distributed Systems Conference, Barcelona, Spain (1997).Google Scholar
- 9.E. Krishnamurthy: Parallel Processing—Principles and Practice. Addison-Wesley, (1989).Google Scholar
- 10.e. Kühn: CoKe White Paper, TU Vienna, E185/1, (1993).Google Scholar
- 11.e. Kühn: Multidatabase Language Requirements. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Research Interests in Data Engineering, RIDE-93, Vienna, (1993).Google Scholar
- 12.e. Kühn: Fault-Tolerance for Communicating Multidatabase Transactions. 27th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). IEEE, January 4–7, Wailea, Maui, Hawaii, (1994).Google Scholar
- 13.e. Kühn: A Distributed and Recoverable Linda Implementation with Prolog&Co. Austrian-Hungarian Workshop on Distributed and Parallel Systems (DAPSYS'96), Miskolc, Hungary, (1996).Google Scholar
- 14.R. Orfali, D. Harkey, J. Edwards: The Essential Distributed Objects Survival Guide.Wiley (1996).Google Scholar
- 15.H. Osterle et al: Middleware-Grundlagen, Produkte und Anwendungsbeispiele für die Integration heterogener Welten. Vieweg (1996).Google Scholar
- 16.C. Pancake: Software Support for Parallel Computing: Where are we Headed? Communications of the ACM. Vol. 34, No. 11, (1991).Google Scholar
- 17.http://www.omg.orgGoogle Scholar
- 18.info@iona.comGoogle Scholar