uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam Lally" <ala...@alum.rpi.edu>
Subject Re: Delta CAS
Date Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:48:50 GMT
> Back to the high-water mark ... isn't it just the largest xmi id in the
> serialized CAS?  Its relationship to the CAS heap is a matter of
> implementation but presumably we can have a design that says any new FSs
> must be given an xmi id above the high-water mark when serialized back from
> a service.  We already have the requirement that ids must be preserved for
> the merging of parallel replies.

Yes - there are really two definitions of high-water mark floating
around in this thread and it would be good to split them apart.

(1) the largest xmi:id in the serialized CAS.  This is a requirement
that the service protocol places on the CAS serializer.  This is what
we already have for merging, and I don't think Thilo is objecting to

(2) a dependency on the FS address being an indicator of which FS are
newer than others (an FS with a larger address is newer).

As I think about it now I am actually unclear on whether we are doing
#2 right now at all.  Bhavani said we were, but that's not how I
recall that the serializer currently works.  It keeps a table of all
the incoming FS, which is necessary in order to have the xmi:ids going
out be the same as the ones coming in.  So I thought the serializer
just used the fact that an FS was missing from this table to determine
that it was new, and *not* a high water mark of the FS address.
Bhavani, can you clarify?


View raw message