Hi, On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Marcel Reutegger <[email protected]> wrote: >> We'd need to revise the MicroKernel contract for that, essentially to >> require that a commit be rejected if it isn't based on the latest >> revision. Without separate journals like in the SegmentMK, that would >> introduce a major scalability bottleneck. > > hmm, I don't think so. the contract allows the implementation to merge > concurrent changes when the commit() (or merge()) isn't done with the > current head revision.
Right, I was thinking of the specific logic used by the SegmentMK (based on your wording "same"). The alternative of retry-on-conflict was already covered in the other part of this thread. BR, Jukka Zitting
