hyc(a)symas.com wrote: > Michael Ströder wrote: >> hyc(a)symas.com wrote: >>> Generating a new contextCSN at startup is of questionable worth. We discussed >>> this a bit 'way back in 2004 >>> http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-devel/200408/msg00035.html Perhaps we >>> should just not do it; >> >> +1 >> >>> if a single-master provider starts up empty and a >>> consumer tries to talk to it and both have an empty cookie, the provider >>> should just respond "you're up to date". >> >> Why not return an error to the consumer? > > Typically if a consumer receives an error it will disconnect and retry later. > There's not much point making the consumer reconnect - which may be costly for > a TCP session. If it's a refreshAndPersist consumer, it just needs to hang on > and wait for some real data to arrive. Is the cost really that high compared to the rest of the initialization?