Take the 2-minute tour ×
Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm currently working on a project that makes connection between different banks which send us information on which that project replies. A part of that project configures the different protocols that are used (not every bank uses the same protocol), this runs on a separate server. These processes all have unique id's which are stored in a database.

But to save time and money on configurations and new processes, we want to make a generic protocol that banks can use. Because of PCI requirements we have to make a separate process for every bank we connect to.

But the generic processes have only 1 unique identifier and therefor we cannot keep them apart. Giving every copy of that process a different identifier is as I see it impossible because they run entirely separate.

So how do I keep my generic process unique?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 0 down vote accepted

A Universily Unique ID should work for your problem. Since they generate unique IDs across multiple independent systems.

share|improve this answer

It sounds like you need a coordinator that watches and monitors all the other processes and handles database communication. This keeps the processes separate and the coordinator would assign unique identifiers to each process and then handle responses as needed.

The coordinator would be something that executes all the time and can react to the situation at hand. Your description sounds like more someone is kicking off a process manually. This could still be used but they would talk to the coordinator program first and it would do that actions and manage everything with the database.

share|improve this answer
    
It is true that these processes are kicked off manually because we only need about 1 process every 3 months and then it runs for multiple years (Our oldest process is running for 20 years now). If it's a new protocol it is configured and then started. If the generic one is used it's a copy of the generic process. Maybe a coordinating class is a bit overkill? –  Steve Van Opstal Nov 16 '12 at 7:56
    
@reply Seems so. You didn't put that information in your post. :) –  Thraka Nov 16 '12 at 21:12

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.