On 12/10/11 11:46 AM, Sebastiano Peluso wrote:

Hi Manik,

in order to provide correct answers to your questions, I want to ask you the following:

- Why do you say that the current MVCC implementation is non-genuine? I think that for any transaction T, only the sites that replicate the data items read/written by T exchange messages during the execution of T and in order to decide the final outcome of T. Is it correct?

It's an overloading of the meaning of the word genuine.

In the paper we referred to the meaning of genuine as of in the context of partial replication protocols: the algorithm only involves nodes that maintain data accessed in the tx.

I think Manik is referring to the fact that ISPN's MVCC implementation does not guarantee serializability.

P