Howard Chu wrote:
The perceived problem isn't a problem with syncrepl, and I don't see a compelling general use case for this.
Hm, I take this back. If we're pushing syncrepl through a proxy, the proxy could use this control. Though it may not matter much if no other servers implement the control...
Honestly, I also think this might be of very little use; from a theoretical point of view, any replication or otherwise push synchronization could just send the user's data as is, and wrap DSA specific data in that control, but it would sort of being a waste of resources, except for modrdn. Another approach, which came to mind right after posting my previous message, is that we could simply add a modify and wrap everything with a transaction... when available, of course!
p.