[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy...
From: |
Eric Altendorf |
Subject: |
Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy... |
Date: |
Fri, 3 May 2002 17:00:20 -0700 |
On Friday 03 May 2002 16:45, Bill Lance wrote:
> --- address@hidden wrote:
> > I agree with the looseness of LDS within a cluster
> > but a 2 phase commit will
> > provide better reliability and rollback support.
>
> How can we do it without locking up processes?
The only processes which would have to be locked are those which are
attempted to read from or write to the block being modified. I think.
Eric
--
"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you. And then you win." -Gandhi
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., morphius, 2002/05/03
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., morphius, 2002/05/03
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Bill Lance, 2002/05/03
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/07
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Bill Lance, 2002/05/07
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/08
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Bill Lance, 2002/05/08
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/08
Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., morphius, 2002/05/07
Fwd: Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/08