[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsdm] Thoughts on "transaction" wording for MUWS
Here are some suggestions: [TRANS.001] The Manageability Interface MUST support, as part of the management information, a "unit of work" that consists of multiple actions against a single resource. [TRANS.002] The Manageability Interface MUST support, as part of the management information, a "unit of work" that consists of the same action applied to multiple resources that the manageable resource knows about. What do you think? Shel Finkelstein wrote: > My immediate thoughts on your questions; I'll defer to Andrea if she joins > in too: > > 1. I probably wasn't around for the scope discussion, but you take great > minutes, so you must be correct. I'd pick B over A. > > 2. Manageable resource doesn't support definition; requirement was that the > spec define units of work with these characteristics. This leads to the > subsequent requirements. But I'm easy; can you suggest better wording? > > Thanks. > > Shel > > > John DeCarlo wrote: > >>Shel, >> >>Thanks. >> >>1. I thought we had agreed that the part of transaction management that >>was in scope was getting information from one manageable resource >>through the manageability interface. >> >>Thus we need some clarification wherever it says "multiple resources". >> >>I lean toward one of these two options: >> >>A) "multiple resources within the manageable resource" >> >>or >> >>B) "multiple resources that the manageable resource has information about." >> >>AND >> >>2. How can the manageability interface support a definition???? >>Perhaps the manageability interface must just support identification. >> >>Shel Finkelstein wrote: >> >> >>>John, here's current version; Andrea and I are very close to convergence, >>>but she should have last word on some edits I made. I'm sending on to you >>>now only because you requested latest iteration for inclusion before you >>>left for the day. >>> >>>Shel >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>>Section Heading - Collections of Management Actions and Transactions >>> >>>NOTE: This section may affect and be affected by requirements for >>>long-running business transactions/business processes and workflows. >>> >>>[TRANS.001] MUST support the definition of a "unit of work" that consists of >>>multiple actions against a single resource >>>[TRANS.002] MUST support the definition of a "unit of work" that consists of >>>the same action applied to multiple resources >>>[TRANS.003] MUST support the definition of a "unit of work" that consists of >>>multiple actions against multiple resources >>> >>>[TRANS.004] MAY support execution of a unit of work against multiple >>>resources >>>[TRANS.004.1] MUST support execution of a unit of work against a single >>>resource >>>[TRANS.005] MUST support idempotence for units of work against one or more >>>resources >>>* NOTE 1: Should this also be a requirement for single actions against a >>>resource? >>>* NOTE 2: If units of work are not supported, this requirement is met >>>trivially >>>[TRANS.006] MUST report status, errors or lack of support for execution of a >>>unit of work against one or more resources >>> >>>[TRANS.007] SHOULD support requests for asynchronous execution of actions >>>against >>>one or more resources, within a unit of work, with (idempotent) callbacks >>>* NOTE 7.1: How are singleton asynchronous resource requests called out? >>> >>>[TRANS.008] MAY support requests for atomic (all-or-nothing) execution >>>of a unit of work against one or more resources >>>[TRANS.008.1] If asynchronous actions are supported (TRANS.007) and >>>asynchronous actions occur in at atomic unit of work, then eventual >>>execution of the asynchronous actions MUST be guaranteed if the atomic unit >>>of work is completed, with ensuing consequent callbacks also guaranteed >>>[TRANS.009] MUST report status, errors or lack of support for atomic >>>execution of a unit of work against one or more resources >>> >>>[TRANS.010] MAY allow changes for partially completed units of work to >>>be externally visible >>>[TRANS.010.1] If atomic units of work are supported (TRANS.008), then >>>changes due to the actions in the unit of work SHOULD NOT be externally >>>visible until the unit of work has completed >>> >>>[TRANS.011] MUST support requests for rollback of atomic units of works that >>>have not completed >>>[TRANS.012] MUST support status for rollback requests for atomic units of >>>work >>>[TRANS.013] SHOULD support time-out for a unit of work consisting of >>>multiple actions against one or more resources, with callback that may >>>result in a rollback request for that unit of work >>> >> >>-- >> >>John DeCarlo, The MITRE Corporation, My Views Are My Own >>email: jdecarlo@mitre.org >>voice: 703-883-7116 >>fax: 703-883-3383 >>DISA cube: 703-882-0593 > > -- John DeCarlo, The MITRE Corporation, My Views Are My Own email: jdecarlo@mitre.org voice: 703-883-7116 fax: 703-883-3383 DISA cube: 703-882-0593
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]