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?
I meant "TLS" there.
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp.