Appeal No. 2002-1950 Page 3
Application No. 09/234,514
providing transactions including object-changing actions and/or
object non-changing actions, said object changing actions include
changing content of an object and/or updating said object by said
transaction writing a new content into a new version of said object;
performing a first phase of requesting access to objects affected by
a transition, locking said objects after access thereto has been obtained,
and performing all object changing actions by said transaction;
performing a second phase of committing said transaction and
releasing all locks set in said first phase; and
performing a third phase of retaining a current version of said
object prior to said transaction until no further transactions make use of
said current version, retaining access for reading concerned object
versions, carrying out a largest possible number of non-changing actions
by the transition, and closing access to said objects after performing said
non-changing actions.
Claims 1, 4-10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 24-25, and 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,280,612 (“Lorie”). Claims 3, 12, 15, 18,
21, and 26 stand rejected under § 103(a) as obvious over Lorie in view of U.S. Patent
No. 6,026,401 (“Brealey”).
OPINION
Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or the appellant in toto, we
address the main point of contention therebetween. The examiner asserts, "Lorie
discloses performing a query after an updating transaction (lines 3-7 in col. 5)."
(Examiner's Answer at 7.) He opines that "after the update, the same transaction may
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007