Comment by kiitos

Comment by kiitos 3 days ago

I think I'm probably operating with definitions of client and commit that are different than yours.

Specifically, I don't really see how a client can "commit locally" and "commit globally" as separate things. I understand a client to be something that interacts with your metastore API, which provides a single "commit" operation, that AFAICT will return success/failure based on local commit state, not global state.

Is that not correct?

Later on in the design.md you say

> The Client will be a Rust library ...

which might be the missing link in this discussion. Is the system model here assuming that clients are always gonna be Rust code in the same compilation unit as the Graft crate/library/etc.?

mdavidn 2 days ago

Graft's definition sounds more like a Git "commit" than one found in a SQL standard. Perhaps that's the source of this confusion?

Reply View 2 replies

kiitos a day ago

That may be the case, but the Git notion of a "commit" is a domain concept that is unrelated to, and incompatible with, the distsys notion of a "commit". And terminology like "strict serialization" and "snapshot isolation" and so on -- which this system and its docs reference -- are distsys concepts, not Git concepts. So "commit" needs to abide distsys rules, not Git rules, as you can't really mix-and-match definitions across domains.

Reply View | 0 replies
drewcoo 2 days ago

Git is a DVCS. The D stands for distributed, meaning (in old people language) masterless. Git doesn't have a "global."

Reply View | 0 replies