[x500standard] Re: Rate of updates vs. rate of inquiries
- From: "Ramsay, Ron" <Ron.Ramsay@xxxxxx>
- To: "x500standard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <x500standard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, SG17-Q11 <t09sg17q11@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:04:40 +0000
These considerations seem to apply to a particular implementation and not to
the standard itself. I would rather see the assumptions removed. (If you make
the directory look like a database, people will use the database over the
directory.)
-----Original Message-----
From: x500standard-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:x500standard-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kemp, David P.
Sent: Tuesday, 20 March 2012 4:45 AM
To: Directory list; SG17-Q11
Subject: [x500standard] Re: Rate of updates vs. rate of inquiries
Since database optimization for transaction (update-intensive)
processing differs from analytic (query-intensive) processing, it seems
appropriate to state the assumption. In particular, a directory should
not permit "eventual consistency", and the assumption of a query-heavy
workload should be taken very literally, or even strengthened into a
requirement for "absolute consistency".
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: x500standard-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:x500standard-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Erik Andersen
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 1:00 PM
To: Directory list; SG17-Q11
Subject: [x500standard] Rate of updates vs. rate of inquiries
In different places of the Directory Specifications we can find
statement saying: "It is assumed that there is a considerably higher
frequency of queries than of updates". Is that still an important
assumption for our specifications if we disregard shadowing?
It is my experience that statements like this are taken very literal.
Erik
-----
www.x500standard.com: The central source for information on the X.500 Directory
Standard.
-----
www.x500standard.com: The central source for information on the X.500 Directory
Standard.
Other related posts:
