From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-22 05:41:07
Matt Hurd <matt.hurd_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:37:03 +0200, Alexander Terekhov <terekhov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Matt Hurd wrote:
>> First off, atomocity without memory ordering and visibility protocol
>> is pretty useless.
> For many, perhaps most, tasks yes. However, think of a database
> without locking... it can still be useful with optimistic concurrency
> for some styles of application. Atomic memory transactions are just a
> guarantee that the "bits" are consistent.
They typically don't exist for "records" of more than one word, if
I'm not mistaken. How useful is that for a database?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk