Re: typical TAF failover times?
From: Frank van Bortel <frank.van.bortel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 20:40:27 +0100
Message-ID: <28686$47acb02c$524b5c40$27561@cache3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>
>
> It doesn't need one but it sure does benefit from one.
>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 20:40:27 +0100
Message-ID: <28686$47acb02c$524b5c40$27561@cache3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>
DA Morgan wrote:
> Frank van Bortel wrote:
>> Comments on the application needing TAF support?
>
> It doesn't need one but it sure does benefit from one.
>
Seriously - does the application need to be modified or can it be left alone in a situation where TAF is introduced? I thought the app needed to be able to realize it had redo the transaction.
In a "classic" setup, the connection would be lost, and the user would have to reconnect. The user realizes things have gone sour, and has to redo the transaction.
Comparing those two scenario's, the app with TAF has different source code than the one without.
-- Regards, Frank van Bortel Top-posting in UseNet newsgroups is one way to shut me upReceived on Fri Feb 08 2008 - 13:40:27 CST