Re: Transactions: good or bad?
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 10:05:52 +0100
Message-ID: <b9qev4$381u$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com>
"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message
news:P21wa.367$xF5.71850115_at_mantis.golden.net...
> "Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message
> news:b9nu5p$2f7s$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com...
> > I allow no rollbacks in my model (short of system failures)
>
> Is deadlock a system failure?
>
No. In my scheme locks are just plain old relational data. Clients would have
to poll to wait for a change in a lock value so making deadlocks a client
issue!!
However, I am toying with the idea of some generalised 'wait until condition'
ability, that would allow clients to wait on other's locks as well as any
other database condition. As part of such an ability, the DBMS might be able
to provide a 'deadwait' detection system between seperate clients. I'm waiting
on something only you can change, you're waiting on something that only I can
change. Or rather it might be better to have a constraint on 'wait until
conditions' that prevents the acceptence of any deadlocked waits requests in
the first place.
Regards
Paul Vernon
Business Intelligence, IBM Global Services
Received on Tue May 13 2003 - 11:05:52 CEST