[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: direct local change when a consumer chains a write to the producer?

> I note that an alternative to copying the result of
> the modify to slave, another way to address inconsistent
> reads after modify is to chain the read as well.
>
> That is, if a server chains a modify for a client, it
> should then chain any subsequent read of that entry
> by that client as well.  That is, treat this read as
> if it included a dontUseCopy control.

Agree; but I fear the issue here is to workaround the behavior of clients
that shouldn't even be aware of contacting a replica, not to mention the
dontUseCopy control; of course, if the client uses that control under the
assumption that it might be contacting a replica, everything __should__ go
smooth.  Or do you mean that the replica should keep track of those
entries it sent a referral on update, and act as if the control was
attached?  This really sounds like going off track.  In this case, I'd
rather prefer chaining the operation and (optionally) syncing.

-- 
Pierangelo Masarati
mailto:pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it



Ing. Pierangelo Masarati
Responsabile Open Solution

SysNet s.n.c.
Via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA
http://www.sys-net.it
------------------------------------------
Office:   +39.02.23998309          
Mobile:   +39.333.4963172
Email:    pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it
------------------------------------------