- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:51:03 -0500
- To: "Ietf-Dav-Versioning (E-mail)" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
I wouldn't really call this "batch processing", but in case the response to a request (such as MERGE) implies a series of actions that need to be done by a client (such as resolving the merge conflicts), it would be friendly for a client to guide the user wrt what actions still need to be performed. In the case of the MERGE method, the information about what actions still need to be performed is maintained on the server (in the DAV:merge-set and DAV:auto-merge-set of the VCRs in a workspace), so a client can always retrieve this information from the server (e.g. by a Depth:infinity PROPFIND on the workspace for the DAV:merge-set and DAV:auto-merge-set properties). Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Kirmse, Daniel [mailto:daniel.kirmse@sap.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 7:52 AM To: Ietf-Dav-Versioning (E-mail) Subject: Philosophical: Batch processing Hi, I have a philosophical question dealing with batch processing in DeltaV. Is it right to suppose that batch processing functionality must be provided by the client? Well lets take an example. Merging a workspace (containing a complete codeline) into another workspace may be a huge task to fullfill. Typically such tasks/jobs would be startet in batch mode. So a client could or would have to provide a scheduler that is the tool for scheduling batch jobs. Problem is that the server would reply instantly when the request is completely performed. The client would have to store the replies to provide them as soon as they are requested. This is definitly a way to it. But what about this MERGE above? Typically the reply contains failed merges that have to be handled somehow. Performing such a MERGE would raise failures that different developers have to handle. So a central batch processing support would be a nice thing. Anyway you still could have an administrator client that provides batch processing and messaging of failures to the developer responsible. Does anyone has experiences with this topic? Oppinons? Regards, Daniel
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 08:51:37 UTC