Andrew Berry wrote: > I'd urge caution whenever you use the terms > "global" and "state" in the same phrase. > If you're talking about modelling then it's probably OK, > but run-time state shared between participants > connected via the Internet is a recipe for software > that will never perform or scale. [...] > There are co-ordination approaches that can operate > on a local, partial view of the process state. > HP have done this in their labs with some > of their workflow tools. My PhD thesis provides > another solution. It is feasible to *align* (not *share*) state among participants in Internet business transactions. Several standardized protocols exist including OASIS-Business Transaction Protocol (BTP), ebXML BPSS, UNCEFACT-BCP, and RosettaNet. At the end of a business transaction, one can say with a high degree of reliability that the participants will agree on a common state of (for example) an order. One feature all of the above protocols have in common is relaxation of ACID rules, for example, no locking required. -Bob HaugenReceived on Wednesday, 16 July 2003 10:48:09 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 01:00:25 GMT