W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2003

RE: Operations not Atomic (was: bind draft issues)

From: Jason Crawford <nn683849@smallcue.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:31:29 -0500
To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "Brian Korver" <briank@xythos.com>, "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFA7EB80DD.AB060CBC-ON85256CE1.0001D4D7@us.ibm.com>




> > For MOVE, I mostly mean the DELETE that occurs when the MOVE causes
> > an overwrite, although I could be convinced that ending up with 2
> > bindings to the collection in the event of an interrupted MOVE,
> > while inadvisable, shouldn't be prohibited.
>
> That's indeed a problem. All "overwrite" operations require a DELETE
(this
> also applies to BIND (!)), so having them atomic when the target is a
> collection has the same problems has the collection DELETE itself.


I am curious...

What does a system that doesn't support "atomic delete"
do in this situation if it gets stuck midway though the deallocation
portion
of the DELETE?   Does it leave the destination partially deleted and
abort the operation leaving it up the client to figure out what state this
was all left in?


------------------------------------------
Phone: 914-784-7569,   ccjason@us.ibm.com
I do not check nn621779@smallcue.com
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 19:37:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:03 GMT