- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 14:03:00 PST
- To: gjw@wnetc.com
- CC: ejw@kleber.ics.uci.edu, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> The difficulty here is tha the processes involved my be unrelated, even > unaware of eachothers' existence. If they reside on separate hosts they may > follow different proxy chains simply because of network topology and no > switching of proxies involved. I'm sorry, I was being really terse when I talked about "sequential transparency". What I meant was that if client A does a "GET x; UPDATE y; GET x" that the second "GET x" properly reflects the changes made by "UPDATE y"; however, if client B does "GET x", even at a time AFTER the "UPDATE y" happened, client B might see the original data. If what you want is "sequential transparency" then you don't need to deal with totally unrelated processes, you only have to deal with a single process (client A) which potentially might switch between one proxy and and another. Larry
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 1996 18:53:58 UTC