Ying Zhang wrote: > Hi Maurice, > > Stupid me. I only described how the current XRPC implementation is, > but forgot to mention the ongoing work. > > On Mar 28, 2008, at 09:35 , Keulen, M. van (Maurice) wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> Does it also mean that if I send a stream of messages to one server >> that all carry the same request-ID without waiting for a result of a >> message before sending out the next, that all are handled in the >> correct order and each is handled after completion of the previous >> one? In that case, it meets all my requirements. In fact, it gives >> much more than I ask for :-) I definitely like to follow any >> developments for this one! > > This can be easily supported by adding a sequence number to each > request message, I think. > > But, if you have an updating request, and then a read-only request, do > you then want to make the updates made by the first request visible to > the second request? > Comparing it to the behaviour of a relational DBMS doing 'begin transaction ; update ; select ; commit' then, yes, I expect the effect of the update to be visible for the select, but not visible to select's done in other concurrently running transactions (the I of isolation in ACID).
Maurice. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr.Ir. M. van Keulen - Assistant Professor, Data Management Technology Univ. of Twente, Dept of EEMCS, POBox 217, 7500 AE Enschede, Netherlands Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phone: +31 534893688, Fax: +31 534892927 Room: ZI 3039, WWW: http://www.cs.utwente.nl/~keulen ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Monetdb-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-developers
