Am 15.04.11 17:01, schrieb Manik Surtani:
On 10 Apr 2011, at 21:07, Olaf Bergner wrote:
> Keep in mind that so far I have completely ignored the issue of
> supporting transactions when reading and writing large objects. I would
> prefer to have a working core implementation before tackling the more
> complicated aspects.
How do you maintain consistency without transactions? E.g., Concurrent readers and a
writer?
Concurrent writers isn't a problem since we don't support this, however we may be
able to add some kind of concurrent write support if we consider the streams as
append-only.
I never meant to actually *publish* large object support without
mechanisms ensuring consistency in place. Yet I would prefer to have
most of the other issues - what should the official API's first
iteration look like?, is the approach I've taken so far basically sane?
and so forth - sorted before moving on to the more complicated aspects.
So far, it took some time to get used to the code base and acquire
*some* knowledge about INFINISPAN's inner workings, but it hasn't been
exactly rocket science. Just a lot of work. Ensuring consistency,
however, won't probably be that easy. Especially since I only have a
very shallow understanding of INFINISPAN's transaction support's inner
workings.
Cheers
Manik
--
Manik Surtani
manik(a)jboss.org
twitter.com/maniksurtani
Lead, Infinispan
http://www.infinispan.org
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev