From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6f80b41b84205927
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-08-11 06:20:55 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!feed.news.nacamar.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.enyo.de!not-for-mail
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: databases written in ada
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 15:20:55 +0200
Organization: Enyo -- not your organization
Message-ID: <87vg6h1qh4.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
References: <3D53CE34.45F25F4@btinternet.com> <3D547FFD.3030808@cogeco.ca>
 <aj27dc$18gndv$1@ID-125932.news.dfncis.de> <87eld7oz3f.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
 <aj3b4b$17evr0$1@ID-125932.news.dfncis.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: deneb.enyo.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: cygnus.enyo.de 1029072038 4612 212.9.189.171 (11 Aug 2002 13:20:38
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@enyo.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Aug 2002 13:20:38 GMT
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ofZGDixoWoAoGEus56QnMq0BAVY=
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27927
Date: 2002-08-11T13:20:38+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> writes:

>> And how is this supposed to work if there are multiple users of the
>> same database?
>
> I suppose that means that the datatypes have to be able to have some
> sort of identity so that you can distinguish between instances that
> may be associated with a particular user and those that need to have
> 'global' scope and would be shared across users.

This won't solve the fundamental problem: even if you automatically
introduce transactions, the underlying database will sometimes have
to roll back transactions if they are not serializable.  As a result,
the transaction has to be started from scratch.  I don't see how you
can do this implicitly (at least in a language which is not purely
functional).