--- Rob Siemborski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > C1: a1 lock_the_selected_mailbox > > S : a1 OK mailbox is yours > [snip] > > C2, of course, wins in this case if it just gets and holds the mailbox > lock first. In fact, in this case C1 has *no* chance of ever deleting the > message if it loses the first race.
Yes, but it is a different situation. A lock in the protocol gives explicit concurrency control. Anyway, IMAP is not SQL :) and maybe explicit locking is not a wise idea right now. IMHO, for an IMAP server developer explicit locking may be a fancy feature, but if I were an IMAP client developer for small devices I would like to have an explicit concurrency control. Marcel
