[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Ozone object identity...
I've been following this thread on and off, so forgive me if i'm out of
line...
Wouldn't using a hardware id tie you into that one machine? What if the
machine was upgraded? If you used a machine id such as its host name, then
it is transparent what is behind it. Could even be an Ozone cluster. So
long as it knows about the right objects, does it matter? Do these issues
exist in Versant? How do they avoid them/get around them?
I'm sure there is a good reason for everything, but I am just curious (or
ignorant?) as to why you need such a low level identifier.
Matt Smith m.smith@secureinteractive.com
Technical Lead www.secureinteractive.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Richardson [mailto:eric@milagrosoft.com]
> Sent: Friday, 4 May 2001 12:33 AM
> To: ozone-dev@ozone-db.org
> Subject: Re: Ozone object identity...
>
>
> Michael Keuchen wrote:
> >
> >
> > Remember that the identity can not be GEU in all cases, e.g.
> > when using a local database or a RemoteDatabase in an intranet.
> > The identity can store as many informations as possible about the
> > object location, but global uniqueness is not ensured.
>
> Microsoft has an algorithm for DCOM I believe provides a GUID
> (Globally
> unique ID). Versant and their three part ID based on machine id +
> objectbase id + object id claimed to be unique.
> I think the three part scheme make alot of sense although I don't know
> how to get the ethernet id in Java for the first part but we know that
> ethernet id is unique otherwise TCP/IP wouldn't work. I discussed this
> in another part oif this thread.
>
> Eric
>