Re: Transaction/Locking with LDAP

[Sanjay.Jain@software.com (Sanjay Jain)]

What is the solution for directory applications which don't need distributed
and partioned
directory but need transactions ?  I think lot of such directory
applications are coming up.
>From that point of view support for transactions in LDAP is a big plus.

My $.02.

sanjay

Alan Lloyd wrote:

> Eric - I had similar thoughts transactions but its the job of ISO CCR to
> do commitment which I think DTP used. So X.500 supported by CCR is the
> theoretical solution.
> However, implementing distributed systems with transaction rollbacks is
> tall order - thats to get the products  to industry strength and
> commercial grade. EG. a DAP stack is about 130kb but a DSA is 100 - 200
> times that. CCR as just a protocol set - may be 6-12 man months
> development. CCR in a fully robust distributed system  (ie. 20 DSAs +)
> is 100 times the effort. Just think of all the investment that has gone
> into X.500 and LDAP development and still there are a lot of shakey
> implementations re distribution, performance, cashing issues, etc. So
> distributed CCR on X.500  has to be in my book a $5-10m dollar
> development. And that quote is from someone who quotes development costs
> for directory developments.
>
> X.500 as an object paradigm is robust. DISP as a transaction/replication
> paradigm is robust. The use of commercial RDB back ends with  commitment
> services and the ability to switch archive the DIB ensures these
> paradigms are robustly implemented.
>
> regards alan
> PS there are always religious wars in standards groups (IETF, ISO and
> ITU) and in fact these wars also happen in religious groups. I think
> these wars are:
> a) part of what us humans do.
> b) applied when engineering debates are not well supported eg.  "to
> avoid the overheads and complexity of OSI and DAP"  = religion...  as
> these are 130kb. Half of which is produced automatically by an ASN.1
> compiler. ie. Manual coding effort for OSI and DAP is 65kb of code.
> Manual coding effort for LDAP is 200+kb of code for less functions.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Erik Andersen [SMTP:ERA@FL.DK]
> > Sent: Friday, June 05, 1998 1:16 AM
> > To:   'ldapext'
> > Subject:      RE: Transaction/Locking with LDAP
> >
> > From the very beginning I believed, i.e. back in 1983-84 I believed
> > that
> > X.500 in stead of ROSE should use Distributed Transaction Processing
> > (DTP)
> > which was at that time a very well developed protocol based on IBM LU
> > 6.2
> > and had all the features of two phase commitment and roll backs. It
> > would
> > therefore not require years, but some added implementation cost, but
> > probably not millions of dollars. However, as usual, I was alone. The
> > chairman of the ISO Directory group was totally against it. "Directory
> > is
> > stateless and shall stay that way". We also had our religious wars
> > within
> > ISO.
> >
> > Erik Andersen, Consultant, Direct Tel. (+45) 3945 0736, Mobile: (+45)
> > 2097
> > 1490
> >  E-mail: era@fl.dk
> >
> > FISCHER & LORENZ A/S
> > Tuborg Parkvej 10, DK-2900 Hellerup, Copenhagen, Denmark
> > Tel. (+45) 3945 0700, Fax (+45) 3945 0777, E-mail: fl@fl.dk, Internet:
> > http://www.fl.dk
> >
> > CEN/ISSS Directory Workshop chairman, Internet:
> > http://www.cenorm.be/isss/workshop/dir/welcome.htm
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:       Alan Lloyd [SMTP:Alan.Lloyd@OpenDirectory.com.au]
> > > Sent:       4. juni 1998 01:14
> > > To: ERA@FL.DK
> > > Subject:    RE: Transaction/Locking with LDAP
> > >
> > > I hope not.
> > >
> > > Otherwise we will need resource locking and transaction recovery
> > > mechanisms in LDAP and that is somewhat difficult in distributed
> > > directory systems . It will need this - otherwise the transaction ID
> > > will just be a cosmetic protocol field.
> > >
> > > Isnt it odd that one can add a few bytes to a protocol field to say
> > > "transaction ID" and put that on a sheet of paper in 10 minutes.
> > But to
> > > make that work in a commercial tested large scale object oriented
> > > distributed name based transaction system that has true rolback
> > > integrity it will take years and millions of dollars...
> > >
> > > regards alan
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From:     Ringer, Oded [SMTP:Oded.Ringer@gs.com]
> > > > Sent:     Thursday, June 04, 1998 1:50 AM
> > > > To:       'ietf-ldapext@netscape.com'
> > > > Subject:  Transaction/Locking with LDAP
> > > >
> > > > Is there any thought to include transaction management in LDAP ?
> > > > -Oded
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Oded Ringer  212-902-7939
> > > > Goldman, Sachs & Co.