Talk:Database-as-IPC
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Chairman wiggy in topic Insufficient detail and authority
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Database-as-IPC article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Insufficient detail and authority edit
Database-as-IPC is not well defined in the article. It provides insufficient detail as to what is meant by using a database as an IPC mechanism. Databases share information between processes as a matter of course. Do they not then provide inter-process communication as part of their design?
In addition, what organizations with credibility within the computing community actually believe that whatever this article is on about is a problem at all?
This article has the smell of arbitrary opinion.
Postgresql provides an inter-process mechanism using LISTEN and NOTIFY commands. Is this also considered part of the asserted problem? [1]
Chairman wiggy (talk) 17:40, 8 February 2017 (UTC)