> Michael Ströder wrote:
>> hyc(a)symas.com wrote:
>>> Generating a new contextCSN at startup is of questionable worth. We
>>> this a bit 'way back in 2004
>>> should just not do it;
>>> 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.