MTS vs .net Framework

[Daryl Davis]

As I am told, the .net Framework nolonger requires MTS. Is this true? If
so, how do I use the .net framework to create instances of dlls on servers.
Daryl Davis

 

[Alvin Bruney [MVP]]

have a look at remoting

 

[Josh Carlisle]

..NET still has MTS/COM+, which it now refers to as Enterprise Services
although it has taken a back seat to other options that are available
natively in .NET to simply "host a dll". If you don't need to use services
specific to enterprise services such as distributed transactions or queued
components you should simply use one of the other native implementations
that .Net offers for exposing/hosting components/classes/data on a server
such as .NET remoting and Web Classes. Each of these options are catered
towards specific needs & business requirements. Enterprise Services adds
unneeded overhead and complexity for simply hosting components.

Regards,

Josh Carlisle

 

[Michael S]

Enterprise Services adds
unneeded overhead and complexity for simply hosting components.

It always has! <g>

I've heard romours of MTS/COM+ being replaced by a completely new .NET
framework in later editions of.NET. Does anyone know if we get that in
whidbey or have to wait for orcas?

 

[Eric Newton]

I believe you're referring to the new Indigo specs, where applications
define services that they perform

At its heart is similar to MSMQ, and messages are supposedly going to all
participate in atomic transactions if warranted.

It'll require a little rework of System.Data.SqlClient classes because it
seems like they still rely on MTS/COM+ for enlisting in any kind of
distributed (object) based transaction