Re: Distributed Computing confusion

Hi Doug,
> > If the argument to DataReference.setData(Data d) on the server
> > is a FieldImpl, then you should be able to cast the return value
> > of DataReference.getData() to FieldImpl.  That is, moving data
> > from the server to the client does not change its class to
> > Remote*.
> >
> What you said reaffirms what I thought, but it's not working in
> practice. Here's some sample code that shows the problem. I get the
> problem on both Linux and NT.
My statement was wrong - sorry about that.  Now that I look at
the getData() method of RemoteDataReferenceImpl, it does convert
a FieldImpl to a RemoteFieldImpl.
The fix is simple.  Replace:
  FieldImpl field = (FieldImpl) ref.getData();
  FieldImpl field = (FieldImpl) ref.getData().local();
in your
Note that RemoteDataReferenceImpl.getData() includes:
  if (data instanceof FieldImpl) {
    boolean return_copy = false;
    if (return_copy) {
      return data;
    else {
      return new RemoteFieldImpl((FieldImpl) data);
  else {
    return data;
The idea is that applications can extend RemoteDataReferenceImpl
and override getData() to decide on some basis whether to return
the FieldImpl (immediate download to the client), or a
RemoteFieldImpl (a remote reference that the client can download
piecemeal via getSample() calls, etc).
I am glad to see VisAD's distributed objects getting used.

Bill Hibbard, SSEC, 1225 W. Dayton St., Madison, WI  53706
hibbard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  608-263-4427  fax: 608-263-6738

  • 1999 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the visad archives: