[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

Ing. Pierangelo Masarati
Responsabile Open Solution

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