> At present, I'm kind of at b). > > But I don't see how that changes the replication consistency. In > particular, replication of the data for which the condition depends > upon would still only eventually consistent. It requires that the server does the work of waiting for the update operation to finish on all slaves. If the update failed on one of the slaves the operation would return an error immediately. > > If what they are after is transactional consistency, there may be > existing LDAP implementations which provide this. I recall something > be presented in this area at LDAPcon. Transactional consistency would solve the problem but I think what they need is somewhat less than transactional consistency. Not sure if it is less enough to warrant a standard extension. Cheers Leif
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Ldapext mailing list Ldapext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext