- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: 2002年1月15日 12:22:57 -0500
- To: WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B103F8AEA8@SUS-MA1IT01>
From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:lisa@xythos.com] > Personally, I'm going to guess they didn't pipeline requests, so > a batch mechanism was a must to get around deficiencies in their > protocol stack. There's potentially a little more to it than that. (1) Imagine a client selects a bunch of resources and drags to move them all to a different folder. A batch MOVE operation can do those in one transaction, so that the whole request fails if not all can be moved. This becomes rather more important if the client is actually using an API (MSDAIPP??) that offers large-scope operations, yet how can it guarantee that operation will work or won't work if it can only send it piecemeal to the server? We should carefully distinguish between BATCH for "pipelining" and BATCH for "transactions". Every server should be able to support a pipelined request, but only servers whose repository is inherently transactioned-based are likely to be able to support transactions. Note that the Bxxx methods supported by the Microsoft Exchange 2000 server are pipelining batch requests, not transactioning batch requests. Cheers, Geoff
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2002 12:24:00 UTC