On 7/6/2010 6:31 PM, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
In what use case would you want to change the database structure without modifying the version? That almost seems like a footgun for consumers.To begin with, 10052 shuts down the "users" of the database completely when only one is changing its structure, i.e., adding or removing an object store. How can we make it less draconian? Secondly, I don't see how that approach can produce atomic changes to the database. Thirdly, we shouldn't need to change version in order to perform database changes. Finally, I am not sure why you consider the syntax proposal simpler. Note that I am not averse to the version change event notification.
Cheers, Shawn
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
