By: rwessel (rwessel.delete@this.yahoo.com), August 24, 2022 9:35 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Anon (no.delete@this.spam.com) on August 24, 2022 8:50 am wrote:
> Andrey (andrey.semashev.delete@this.gmail.com) on August 24, 2022 4:10 am wrote:
> > With MUHTM, you already have the fine grained locking path as a fallback, so I don't see
> > how the code became simpler than just the fine grained locking path without MUHTM.
>
> I am talking about an hypotethical implementation that doesn't require a fallback path.
>
Constrained transactions on Z?
> Andrey (andrey.semashev.delete@this.gmail.com) on August 24, 2022 4:10 am wrote:
> > With MUHTM, you already have the fine grained locking path as a fallback, so I don't see
> > how the code became simpler than just the fine grained locking path without MUHTM.
>
> I am talking about an hypotethical implementation that doesn't require a fallback path.
>
Constrained transactions on Z?