jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chetan Mehrotra <chetan.mehro...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Conflict handling causes spurious observation events
Date Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:47:05 GMT
> The end result in either case is a sequence of events from b1 to h3.

If this is fine (and something which cannot be avoided) then cannot we
just make the NodeState comparable and avoid synchronizing the merge?
As that still allows us to see an ordered flow of changes.

Chetan Mehrotra


On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Chetan Mehrotra
> <chetan.mehrotra@gmail.com> wrote:
>> How this would work in a cluster mode. If two nodes in a cluster
>> perform commit with (base revision, head revision) [b1,h1] and [b1,h2]
>> then how would observation work?.
>
> Assuming h3 is the result of merging h1 and h2, then:
>
> * Node A would see local events b1->h1, followed by external events h1->h3.
> * Node B would see local events b1->h2, followed by external events h2->h3.
>
> The end result in either case is a sequence of events from b1 to h3.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting

Mime
View raw message