[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [bt-spec] URI issue subquestion #2
Peter: > We believe a migrating entity should have a name which is > invariant over all its migrations. > We believe it is a bad idea to allow an entity to change its name. This is a risky strategy. Imagine you have two transaction servers, A and B which provide fail-over fault tolerance for one another. Both are running a single transaction (for the sake of simplicity) and both have chosen the id "1" for those transactions (perhaps they are the first transactions to be run). Now imagine server A crashes and server B being available takes on its workload. It can't create another transaction called "1" because it already has one, which means that you can't always assume that the names you pick will be globally unique (unless you use some kind of qualifier in association with them). I guess you could mandate that an identifier is a GUID which means that name-crashes would be very unlikely? Jim
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC