Michael Ströder wrote: > 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.