DCOM use remote procedure calls to organize data between processes and computers so that components appear to have the same word size, bit orientation, and address space. DCOM is a direct competitor to CORBA, discussed next. V. Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA)

CORBA is OMG's open, vendor-independent architecture and infrastructure that computer applications use to work together over networks (CORBA Basics). Using a standard protocol, a CORBA-based program from any vendor, on almost any computer, operating system, programming language, and network, can interoperate with a CORBA-based program from the same or another vendor, on almost any other computer, operating system, programming language, and network.

The core foundation of CORBA is the Object Request Broker (ORB) that provides an interface between requesting objects and receiving objects (CORBA, TechTarget). ORB support in a network of clients and servers on different computers means that a client program can request services from a server program or object without having to understand where the server is in a distributed network or what the interface to the server program looks like. To make requests or return replies between the ORBs, programs use the General Inter-ORB Protocol (GIOP) and, for the Internet, its Internet Inter-ORB Protocol (IIOP). IIOP maps GIOP requests and replies to the Internet's Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) layer in each computer.

VI. Functions of a Database Application.

There are no major differences between COM's and CORBA's ability to support functions of a database application. COM is built on a proven desktop component architecture; COM-based applications are robust and perform well; and COM's integration into development languages and tools simplifies application development (Tallman, O. And Kain, 1998). However, extending a desktop architecture to the enterprise can be problematic.

In comparison to COM, CORBA has a more...

And Kain, 1998). The disadvantages of CORBA are its complexity and reliance on implementations by vendors which can prove to be highly variable.
VII. Summary and Conclusion

The world of integration middleware is constantly evolving. Initial standards from Microsoft such as ODBC have been replaced by OLE DB which it then enhanced with ADO. And, Microsoft has continued the march into the enterprise with support for distributed component objects via DCOM. Not only do replacement standards emerge, competing standards vie for acceptance. DCOM and COBRA are two examples that each has pros and cons and force companies to make tradeoffs in their application development and interoperability decisions.

Bibliography

Chand, M. (2000, June 25). What is ADO? Retrieved from Web site: http://www.mindcracker.com/mindcracker/c_cafe/ado/ado1.asp

Comparing OLE DB and ODBC. SAS. Retrieved October 11, 2004 from Web site: http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:SG8oogJgknEJ:ftp.sas.com/techsup/download/v8papers/odbcdb.pdf+ODBC+and+%22OLE+DB%22+differences&hl=en

CORBA, TechTarget. Retrieved October 11, 2004 from Web site: http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,sid13_gci213865,00.html

CORBA Basics. Object Management Group. Retrieved October 11, 2004 from Web site: http://www.omg.org/gettingstarted/corbafaq.htm

Open Database Connectivity. TechTarget. Retrieved October 11, 2004 from Web site: http://searchvb.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,sid8_gci214133,00.html

Tallman, O. And Kain, J.B. (1998, September-December) COM vs. CORBA: A Decision Framework. Distributed Computing. Retrieved from Web site: http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/~cm1924/cp3025/distrib/reading/corba/corba3/corba6.html