Jan Klötzke <jan.kloetzke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Am Thursday 24 May 2007 11:38 schrieb Axel Dörfler: > [...] > > Not quite the same: for transactions, an ID allocator wouldn't be > > the > > right solution; it's not just an ID, it's also a sequential number. > > For > > example you can synchronize all inflight transactions up to a > > certain > > ID (this is also the part that would not work anymore with your > > changes). This is very similar to the TCP sequence numbers. > I was not aware of that additional semantics. Sometimes things are > not as > trival as they seem. ;-) That would probably be the moment where the documentation is supposed to kick in :-) Bye, Axel.