Re: ACID et al

paul c wrote:
> I'm interested to see any comments the group has on something I'm
> (haphazardly) working on which in part has to do with guaranteeing the
> ACID properties without locking.

Locking (or any other concurrency mechanism) is relevant only to, well, concurrent transactions.

[...]
> 4) Assume that a message to the engine includes all the db actions for
> some 'business' transaction. These actions might include re-iterated
> reads of rows that were issued in an earlier 'query' message, as well as
> possibly the values that were returned earlier, as well as update actions.
[..]
> Consistency by 4).

I am not sure what you mean here. The way to ensure consistency is to have integrity constraints.

>

[...]
> Basically, I'm talking about an engine that is good at checking
> constraints and thus can be stateless as far as conventional locks are
> concerned, ie., it would have no 'lock manager' component per se.

I do not know what 'stateless' has got to do with the price of fish, but the lock manager is not needed. Received on Mon Dec 05 2005 - 17:20:11 CET