Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 12:10:54 +0200 From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@britannica.bec.de> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New FreeBSD package system (a.k.a. Daemon Package System (dps)) Message-ID: <20070511101054.GA1847@britannica.bec.de> In-Reply-To: <46443E8D.7050301@fer.hr> References: <200705102105.27271.blackdragon@highveldmail.co.za> <f20c8u$htp$1@sea.gmane.org> <4643C7DB.6000408@elischer.org> <f219f6$3ls$1@sea.gmane.org> <863b233dq4.fsf@dwp.des.no> <46443AF0.2070006@fer.hr> <86tzuj1ydn.fsf@dwp.des.no> <46443E8D.7050301@fer.hr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 11:59:41AM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
> I think you're overreacting. You say: if the database is consistent,
> it's ACID ("Avoiding database corruption is a necessary requirement for,
> rather than a consequence of, ACID") and I say: if the database is ACID,
> it's consistent. Aren't we both right?
Database corruption violate I (Integrety) and D (Durability). So you
can't have a database providing ACID without protecting against database
corruption. Consistency is actually the second letter of ACID.
That said, there are limits. Enough issues that can corrupt a sqlite
database can also corrupt the current pkgdb tree. In fact, a number of
issues are less likely to hit sqlite. It doesn't mean that either is
perfect.
Joerg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070511101054.GA1847>