Re: computational model of transactions

paul c wrote:
> Bob Badour wrote:
> ...

>>>>> While that's sometimes necessary, the batch processes I referred to 
>>>>> did not all do that. They just grouped multiple logical units of 
>>>>> work together before issuing a commit. Serializing was handled by 
>>>>> the normal concurrency features and isolation level.
>>>>> ...

(To clarify, if the so-called luw's could have been run in parallel with an acceptable result, the issue of concurrency is moot. I think luw is synonomous with transaction in Gray's sense, even though I know some programmers think program trumps transaction. But then I think programmers are servants, not arbiters.)

p Received on Wed Aug 02 2006 - 02:16:54 CEST