Re: computational model of transactions

paul c wrote:
> 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.
>>>>>> ...
>>
>> In that case, you are talking about serialization and not recognizing it.
>>
>> p
>>
>>

To try to clarify even more, even if nobody wants to hear it, all program 'artifacts', eg. so-called buffers, ought to be eradicated when a transaction ends, in Gray's terms, when locks are released. In other words, all transaction memory.

p Received on Wed Aug 02 2006 - 02:50:33 CEST