Nikunj,
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 8:21 PM, Nikunj Mehta nik...@o-micron.com wrote:
From my examples, it was clear that we need different object stores to be
opened in different modes. Currently dynamic scope supports this use case,
i.e., allow mode specification on a per object-store basis.
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.comwrote:
Making the blob url identical to the lifetime of the blob itself would
expose when garbage collection takes place and in general could lead to
easy to make mistakes in which the developer had something that work
On Monday, July 12, 2010 8:24 AM, David Levin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Making the blob url identical to the lifetime of the blob itself would
expose when garbage collection takes place and in general could lead to
easy to make
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.comwrote:
On Monday, July 12, 2010 8:24 AM, David Levin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Making the blob url identical to the lifetime of the blob itself would
expose
On Monday, July 12, 2010 9:32 AM, David Levin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
The behaviour would have to be explicitly specified and not left to depend on
indeterminate browser implementations.
Yes. Unfortunately, another way of saying
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.comwrote:
On Monday, July 12, 2010 9:32 AM, David Levin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
The behaviour would have to be explicitly specified and not left to
depend on
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 9:59 AM, David Levin le...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.comwrote:
On Monday, July 12, 2010 9:32 AM, David Levin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
The
