Re: TRANSACTION MONITORS

I've been away for about a week and just noticed your msg. Since I also noticed that no one else seems to be interested in this stuff in the oracle newsgroup, how about you just contact me directly and save some network bits, OK? If you are curious, there is an Encina discussion list info-encina_at_transarc.com and a DCE one, info-dce_at_transarc.com, where this kind of stuff if more concentrated. The usual *-request addresses work.

Excerpts from netnews.comp.databases.oracle: 21-Jun-93 TRANSACTION MONITORS Jared Hecker_at_factory.com (3536)

> >transactional RPCs and Encina, and we've been concentrating on making
> >those good for years.
 

> Mark, are you suggesting that competing products, such as Tuxedo or Top
> End, do not operate on a transactional basis?

No, but I think I can make the claim that Encina alone is based on *tranactional RPC* as its communication mechanism. Invoking a transactional server in Encina is written just like any other procedure call -- it happens to carry with it transasctional semantics automagically. Tuxedo and Top End use different communication systems, as does CICS, Guardian, .....

Excerpts from netnews.comp.databases.oracle: 21-Jun-93 TRANSACTION MONITORS Jared Hecker_at_factory.com (3536)

> As for the 'making those good for years' comment - from my recollection
> neither Encina nor Top End have been on the market more than
> twelve-fifteen months.

I think I said that we've been doing TRPCs for years -- about 10 years. The Encina product is a spinoff of technology developed at CMU over the last decade or so, based on transactional remote procedure calls (among other things which are interesting but irrelevant to this discussion -- the interested reader is referred to the book: "Camelot and Avalon"). If memory serves me, the Encina software has been delivered to end user customers since about January 92; OEM customers earlier.

Excerpts from netnews.comp.databases.oracle: 21-Jun-93 TRANSACTION MONITORS Jared Hecker_at_factory.com (3536)

> I believe all three products pass the 'ACID' test.

Probably.

Excerpts from netnews.comp.databases.oracle: 21-Jun-93 TRANSACTION MONITORS Jared Hecker_at_factory.com (3536)

> I understood the major vendors - HP, DEC, IBM, et al - are incorporating
> pieces of DCE, not
> all of it, as they see fit.

Not true. As best I can tell, everyone is planning on all of it. The core components, CDS, Sec, Threads, RPC, DTS are coming out even as we speak. x.500 and file systems seem to be lagging until later this year/early next year.

Excerpts from netnews.comp.databases.oracle: 21-Jun-93 TRANSACTION MONITORS Jared Hecker_at_factory.com (3536)

> A marketing shot, Markl; Oracle is notorious for being promiscuous ...

Let's wait and see.

Excerpts from netnews.comp.databases.oracle: 21-Jun-93 TRANSACTION MONITORS Jared Hecker_at_factory.com (3536)

> Personally, Mark, once I am satsified that you manage my subsystems
> properly, I wouldn't want to know about them - error reporting aside.

If you don't want to know, then you do not have to. Some companies do want to do their own logging for a custom built communications systems, or whatever. Most do not, but why hide the interfaces. Don't want them, don't call them.

The VSAM/DBS/old RDMS discussion is a much lengthier one. If you want, we can have it (or anyone else who wants it). Just call me up at 412-338-4420 because my hand is getting tired typing.

        -Mark Received on Wed Jun 30 1993 - 21:43:25 CEST