| From: | "Taral" <taral(at)cyberjunkie(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)trust(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org>, <pgsql-interfaces(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Subject: | CORBAservices (was RE: [HACKERS] PREPARE) |
| Date: | 1998-11-17 18:21:52 |
| Message-ID: | 000c01be1257$2668a700$8a14f7d0@taral.dobiecenter.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
[ Cross-post to pgsql-interfaces ]
> BTW, what does CORBA prescribe about transactions (if anything) ?
>
> Is the current transaction model adequate or do we need nested
> transactions ?
The Query Service is read-only, so does not have locking or transactions...
We will have to implement the Transaction Service...
Current service list for our implementation: (in order of importance)
Naming Service (provided by most 2.2 ORBs)
LifeCycle Service (provided by mico) (dependent on NS)
Query Service
Security Service
ConcurrencyControl Service
Transaction Service (dependent on CCS)
Relationship Service (provided by mico)
(Not sure about the ordering of the last few...)
As you can see, this is a non-trivial list of interfaces :)
Taral
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Taral | 1998-11-17 18:26:05 | RE: [HACKERS] PREPARE |
| Previous Message | dkelson-list-pgsql-hackers | 1998-11-17 18:17:33 | Re: [HACKERS] New to PostgreSQL, is this a DoS? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Taral | 1998-11-17 18:26:05 | RE: [HACKERS] PREPARE |
| Previous Message | Warren Craig | 1998-11-17 16:36:57 | ODBC and Access |