In article <aom513$ics$1_at_sp15at20.hursley.ibm.com>,
Paul Vernon <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>Now these users *cannot be trusted*. We must allow them to be stupid and/or
>malicious and still maintain a working and integral database.
>
>[...]
>
>Traditionialy such problems are fixed by mandating database access only via
>trusted 'applications', but going forward we should be looking at complete
>application independence for the RDBMS, which means that you cannot *trust*
>the applications accessing your database.
I still fail to see how this tells us that there is something wrong with the
concept of transaction. The problems you mention can be largely solved by
implementing transactions using an optimistic locking protocol. So again I
would say that this is largely an implementation issue and one that may
depend on how much you can trust your users.
Received on Thu Oct 17 2002 - 10:17:47 CDT
