On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 11:50:20AM +0000, Syan Tan wrote: > There was a post about trying to justify using xmin, > which was something like "it isn't pretty enough". Well, XMIN's pretty 'nuff for me at the moment. The thread was mainly to let Dave (and the list archive) know that:
- yes we know XMIN can become a problem sometime later - yes we know how to solve that - yes we are open for patches to do so > Actually, isn't having data cached at clients in database > objects like having a replicated database when two or more > clients have opened the same medical record. multi-master, that is > So if one > could make it look pretty by implementing two-phase commit > protocol amongst all the clients as well as the server. That'd be possible but wouldn't exactly reduce complexity, methinks ? Karsten -- GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346 _______________________________________________ Gnumed-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnumed-devel
