Re: [ldapext] Questions / comments about "LDAP Transactions, draft-zeilenga-ldap-txn-11.txt"

[Howard Chu <hyc@highlandsun.com>]

Christian Hollstein wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have some questions:
>
> According to the draft it is not forbidden, that a client sends non -
> transaction update requests or read - only (compare, search) requests on
> the same connection, after having started the transaction. These
> requests, that don't belong to the transaction (because they don't carry
> the transaction control) could conflict with requests, that are part of
> the transaction. Just imagine the transaction updating some entries,
> that are meanwhile processed in a subtree search. How should the server
> deal with this? Should it process the non - transaction requests after
> having finished the transaction? After having received the commit from
> the client? If non - transaction updates may be mixed with updates, that
> are part of the transaction you either violate the required atomicity,
> or you have to postpone the non - transaction request until the
> transaction is finished, thereby violating the correct order of requests.

I don't see any conflict. The requests that are part of the transaction don't 
actually take any effect until the Commit request is received.
-- 
   -- Howard Chu
   CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
   Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
   Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/
_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
Ldapext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext