Hi Rhys,
On Feb 23, 2011, at 9:17 PM, Rhys Ulerich wrote:
>>> BTW, if we go down this "transaction" path, it allows the HDF5
>>> library to push the fault tolerance up to the application level - the
>>> library could guarantee that the atomicity of what was "visible" in
>>> the file was an entire checkpoint, rather than the atomicity being on
>>> a per-API call basis.
>
>> Hmm. Thats only true if 'transaction' is whole file scope, right? I mean
>> aren't you going to allow application to decide what 'granularity' a
>> transaction should be; a single dataset, a bunch of datasets in a group
>> in the file, etc.
>
> Careful fellas... you'll end up implementing a good part of
> conventional database transactions and their ACID guarantees before
> you're done. And you won't have the benefit of SQL as a lingua
> franca. If you want fancy transaction semantics why not just use a
> database vendor with a particularly rich BLOB API?
I'm definitely not advocating going whole-hog for ACID semantics, but I
think there are certain useful pieces of ACID that can be leveraged. :-)
Quincey
_______________________________________________
Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
[email protected]
http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
