-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jesus Cea wrote:
> I'm reading the "_persistent.c" code and seems that much of the code
> needed is already there. In fact the "_p_touched" is all we need, and is
> already there, for the benefice of the caching code.

Thinking about it wile goind home to sleep a bit, I fond a fatal flaw in
my proposal, as is: it suppose you only have a durus connection per
process, since it only have two singles "touched" and "untouched" lists.

Nevertheless I keep saying that such a litte change shows that precise
conflicts are doable without performance compromise.

> Please, at least consider it.

O:-)

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea@argo.es http://www.argo.es/~jcea/ _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea@jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
                               _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBREuNyZlgi5GaxT1NAQJc4QP+PZ/Bg21mSvcCpLqh2boImPBrzJ5s4o5e
GTC1Wa4OqLetnhtNhZdMx022SMK0nwiB7BZqdZKNPb5fhiTsVXXm+66bNt6B7MRF
1KdtFr5Kq9z7z4isUu3e0N7i1OKlbrWIgywMk70IlBxOissG+bpKi5f343USkCHC
G1VWOJfU2cc=
=sbcP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----