W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 1996

RE: v0.2 draft Distributed Editing Reqts.

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 12:45:50 -0700
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=RED-44-MSG-960906194550Z-33343@INET-03-IMC.itg.microsoft.com>
To: "'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, "'Jim Whitehead'" <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
>Such higher level locking actions can be implemented using single-entity
>locks, and hence I'd prefer not to introduce the added complexity of
>multiple entity simultaneous locks.
>
>- Jim
>
If a user locks files A, B, & C with separate locks and performs a PUT
to A, there is no guarantee that the locks on B & C have not been
already been broken. Thus a mechanism is needed to perform actions on a
group of files in such a way that each individual action is guaranteed
to be atomic with respect to the lock on those files.

Your own paper includes a perfect example of this - A user wishes to
lock an entire web site so as to be able to guarantee global consistency
even if they are only interested in changing a single file. If they have
to lock every file individually, a bandwidth eating action I might add,
they still have no guarantee of global consistency as one or more locks
could be removed for any number of reasons. A multi-file lock will
guarantee that an action will only go through if all the relevant files
are still locked.

>					Yaron
>
Received on Friday, 6 September 1996 15:54:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:41 GMT