Databases Synchronization Proposal

> There is semantic information in the order in which updates are processed.
> Assume the following scenario:
> 1. Someone registers a Bananna object (note typo)
> 2. The database includes & sends ack
> 3. The person finds the typo
> 4. The person deletes Bananna
> 5. The person registers Banana (no typo).
> 
> If these updates are also sent to a shadow copy, then one must make
> shure that (1) comes before (4), otherwise the delete won't work
> and Bananna will still be in (the databases will be out of sync)

	I don't get it. If the update is time stamped (as specified in my
prososal) with 1 second resolution, then ordering of the update is
trivial. If (1) come after (4) then it'll be rejected because it's older.

	As for the lost mail and desynchronisation problem, the FTP
once in the while should solve the problem (as pointed out by Daniel).

		Laurent


-- 
Laurent Joncheray,                                  E-Mail: lpj at merit.edu
    Merit Network Inc, 4251 Plymouth Rd, Suite C,   Phone:  +1 (313) 936 2065
    Ann Arbor, MI 48105, USA                        Fax:    +1 (313) 747 3185
"This is the end, Beautiful friend. This is the end, My only friend, the end" JM



-------- Logged at  Fri Mar 3 16:34:23 MET 1995  ---------