[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy...
From: |
Bill Lance |
Subject: |
Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy... |
Date: |
Fri, 3 May 2002 17:06:49 -0700 (PDT) |
--- Eric Altendorf <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Friday 03 May 2002 16:45, Bill Lance wrote:
> > --- address@hidden wrote:
> > > I agree with the looseness of LDS within a
> cluster
> > > but a 2 phase commit will
> > > provide better reliability and rollback support.
> >
> > How can we do it without locking up processes?
>
> The only processes which would have to be locked are
> those which are
> attempted to read from or write to the block being
> modified. I think.
>
Humm .. If these were part of the backgorund cluster
management activities, it probably wouldn't make a
difference. As long as actual services requests
wern't hold up. And these should be operating from
the cache anyway.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., morphius, 2002/05/03
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., morphius, 2002/05/03
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Bill Lance, 2002/05/03
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/07
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Bill Lance, 2002/05/07
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/08
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Bill Lance, 2002/05/08
- Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/08
Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., morphius, 2002/05/07
Fwd: Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/08
Re: [Vrs-development] IBM Token Ring Thingy..., Chris Smith, 2002/05/08