[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 01:08:35AM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> > >
> > > Thats it, you just RPC'ed foo() with arguments x,y,z, (and no return
> > > value). Pretty slick, I think.
> >
> > Until you have more than one LISTENer... ;)
>
> Yeah, and then its called "highly-distributed parallel virtual RPC" ;>
Well, the problem is if you have more than one LISTENer then you need
some way to know when you can garbage-collect the table. If you use
the SQL that you suggested (and cut out from your response above) then
the first LISTENer will delete the table, leaving all that follow
without any RPC data.... So GC becomes an issue.
I'm __still__ thinking that if we want multi-user we should do it one
level above the database, rather than IN the database.. If we had a
gnucashd sitting on top of a database then multiple gnucash clients
could connect to the gnucashd and then gnucashd could signal events on
all changes made by any client. Would work great, and work with any
database.
> --linas
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnucash.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
