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
>> 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?
> Does the provider know whether it's running as
Generally yes. A single-master setup has serverID=0.
Hmm, this introduces more semantics on serverID. I have some doubts about
Maybe I misunderstood but IMO the issue was about changing a provider to a MMR
replica which would need serverID!=0 anyway.