Talk:Serializability

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User 129.241.138.154 has put a cleanup tag without any concrete suggestions. I shall remove the tag in few days unless this user comes with concrete suggestions for cleanup. User: Comps May 31 2006


Clean-up tag removed Comps 15:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Correctness of sentence in View serializability and Conflict serializability

Currently the View serializability and Conflict serializability section of this article ends with:

"A more general definition of conflicting operations (also for complex operations, which may consist each of several "simple" read/write operations) requires that they are noncommutative (changing their order also changes their combined result). For example, the operations increment and decrement of a counter are both write operations, but do not need to be considered conflicting since they are commutative."

Is the final sentence correct? It seems to be assuming that increment and decrement are atomic, but I don't think this can be assumed in general. My memory is somewhat hazy regarding conflict serialisability though so I haven't changed it. AlyM 13:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

You are right. It is assumed, but still, the sentence is correct. It should be supported by the system as atomic primitives, if such a broadening of conflicts is allowed. I'll add a comment. You are welcome to change, of course. Thanks. Comps 01:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Answer above slightly augmented. Comps 12:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirection from "Serializable (databases)" has been added.

Disambiguation from "Serializable (programming)" may be desirable, since Java and .NET use this term. Comps 14:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation has been added Comps 02:59, 17 March 2007 (UTC)