How CORBA differs from RMI ? Discuss the concepts of IDL briefly.

 The difference between COBRA & RMI are as follows:- 


COBRA

  • CORBA has an implementation for many languages.
  • It uses Interface Definition Language (IDL) to separate interface from implementation.
  • CORBA objects are not garbage collected because it is language independent and some languages like C++ do not support garbage collection.
  • CORBA does not support this code-sharing mechanism.
  • CORBA passes objects by reference.
  • CORBA is a peer-to-peer system.
  • CORBA uses Internet Inter-ORB Protocol as its underlying remoting protocol.
  • The responsibility of locating an object implementation falls on the Object Adapter either Basic Object Adapter or Portable Object Adapter.


RMI

  • RMI is a Java-specific technology.
  • It uses a Java interface for implementation.
  • RMI objects are garbage collected automatically.   
  • RMI programs can download new classes from remote JVMs.
  • RMI passes objects by remote reference or by value.
  • Java RMI is a server-centric model.
  • RMI uses the Java Remote Method Protocol as its underlying remoting protocol.
  • The responsibility of locating an object implementation falls on JVM.

2nd Part :

Interface Description Language (IDL)


An Interface Description Language (IDL) is a specification language used to describe a software component’s interface. IDLs describe an interface in a language-independent way, enabling communication between software components that do not share a language- for example, between components written in C++ and components written in java.

We can’t write the actual programs in IDL because it lacks the logic and flows control structure, instead, IDL concentrates on type definitions, both for primitive and class types, so you can use it instead to define the interface, not implementation. For example, and function used to calculate tax on order might be defined like this :

float calculate_tax(in float amount);

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Suppose that a data warehouse for Big-University consists of the following four dimensions: student, course, semester, and instructor, and two measures count and avg_grade. When at the lowest conceptual level (e.g., for a given student, course, semester, and instructor combination), the avg_grade measure stores the actual course grade of the student. At higher conceptual levels, avg_grade stores the average grade for the given combination. a) Draw a snowflake schema diagram for the data warehouse. b) Starting with the base cuboid [student, course, semester, instructor], what specific OLAP operations (e.g., roll-up from semester to year) should one perform in order to list the average grade of CS courses for each BigUniversity student. c) If each dimension has five levels (including all), such as “student < major < status < university < all”, how many cuboids will this cube contain (including the base and apex cuboids)?

Discuss classification or taxonomy of virtualization at different levels.

Suppose that a data warehouse consists of the four dimensions; date, spectator, location, and game, and the two measures, count and charge, where charge is the fee that a spectator pays when watching a game on a given date. Spectators may be students, adults, or seniors, with each category having its own charge rate. a) Draw a star schema diagram for the data b) Starting with the base cuboid [date; spectator; location; game], what specific OLAP operations should perform in order to list the total charge paid by student spectators at GM Place in 2004?