On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 12:04:52PM +1000, Robert Mueller wrote: > > 1) Pro: > > * simple to calculate - only updated by cyr_expire > > "simple" seems good :) > > > 1) Con: > > * Higher bandwidth use in the "stale client" case. > > If you're not syncing that often, then there's probably enough other > stuff that needs downloading that it'll swamp the bandwidth anyway. > > > 2) Con: > > * Extra bookkeeping - need to update a different record when > > removing an expired record. > > * Replication implications - cyr_expire and replication is already > > going to be tricky - but probably means arbitrary bumping of > > modseq on the previous record to guarantee it replicates. More > > spurious modseq bumps. > > These seem a bit scary to me. > > I'd lean towards (1). Simpler to implement, less side effects, less > chance of odd edge case bugs or replication issues. Slightly more > bandwidth if you don't sync regularly.
Yeah - I think I've decided on (1) with a syslog every time it gets a request that triggers a stale client sync - that way sites (like us!) can see how much they're getting stale syncs, and can decide to either extend their expiry time or agitate to have (2) implemented! Bron.
