W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 1999

Re: resourcetype locknull

From: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:00:06 -0400
Message-ID: <380500E6.6BBC42CB@ecal.com>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
"Geoffrey M. Clemm" wrote:

> Isn't this functionally equivalent to someone getting the lock on the
> lock null resource between the time when you issued the lock request
> and the time it was handled by the server?  The fact that they got the
> lock on the empty dummy resource you created, as opposed to a lock on a
> "lock null" resource doesn't seem to change the situation in any
> substantive way.

Consider what happens if you need to create a resource with a particular
body and some particular properties.  If you don't have lock-nulls (or
transactions), then you do PUT, LOCK, PROPPATCH, UNLOCK (or maybe skip the
LOCK/UNLOCK, since it's only protecting one operation).  If you and
somebody else are trying to create it at the same time, then you could get
PUT1, PUT2, PROPPATCH2, PROPPATCH1, resulting in resource whose properties
don't match its body.  With lock-null, you can do LOCK, PUT, PROPPATCH,
UNLOCK.

--
/==============================================================\
|John Stracke    | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.|
|Chief Scientist |=============================================|
|eCal Corp.      |Never mind the GUIs--Unix won't be for the   |
|francis@ecal.com|masses until we fix backspace & delete.      |
\==============================================================/
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 1999 18:00:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:52 GMT