From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!bionet!apple!oliveb!mipos3!omepd!inteloc!vladimir
From: vladimir@inteloc.intel.com (Vladimir G. Ivanovic)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Handling objects in a distributed system
Message-ID: <4812@omepd.UUCP>
Date: 16 Aug 89 18:13:42 GMT
References: <8908081649.AA02434@chance.mitre.org>
Sender: news@omepd.UUCP
Reply-To: vladimir@inteloc.UUCP (Vladimir G. Ivanovic)
Organization: BiiN, Hillsboro OR
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

dave davis writes:
>
>Ed Berard poses an issue in dealing with objects in a distributed 
>system:  how to send an object to another node.  
>...
>I suggest that an approach would be to transmit "installation
>instructions" (or template, or frame) with each transmitted object so
>that the recieving node only needs to know a general schema for object
>installation.

Maybe there is something I'm missing, but why on earth would one want
to send an object to another node?  Isn't it like passing an array to
a procedure?  Why not just pass the name of the object?  In a truly
distributed system, the name server will provide the access path.
Then there is only one copy and no consistency problem.