[SERVER-1734] Rename "atomic" to "isolated" Created: 04/Sep/10 Updated: 12/Jul/16 Resolved: 12/Feb/13 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | 1.6.2 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Improvement | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Scott Hernandez (Inactive) | Assignee: | Dwight Merriman |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 4 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||
| Participants: | |||||||||||||
| Description |
|
The term isolated is (probably) more technically correct than atomic. The only place where atomic is accurate, more accurate than isolated at least, is for a single document update. For anything that involves more than one document the term isolated should be used as it doesn't imply all-or-nothing semantics. I'd argue that we should just change all instances of "atomic" to "isolated" to be consistent. |
| Comments |
| Comment by auto [ 21/Jun/13 ] |
|
Author: {u'username': u'monkey101', u'name': u'Dan Pasette', u'email': u'dan@10gen.com'}Message: |
| Comment by Scott Hernandez (Inactive) [ 12/Feb/13 ] |
|
Alias added in commit: bab879f96beaaa166c9cfd908864102700c898e5 |
| Comment by Dwight Merriman [ 17/Sep/12 ] |
|
or just deprecate it if it isn't going to work with sharding. |