On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 03:25:47PM -0800, Han Zhou wrote: > > I checked the current python OVSDB IDL implementation, and found out that > > the way local cache is handled during transaction commit is like this, as > > commented in idl.py: > > > > Committing a transaction rolls back all of the changes that it made > > to > > the IDL's copy of the database. If the transaction commits > > successfully, then the database server will send an update and, > > thus, > > the IDL will be updated with the committed changes.""" > > > > If a transaction commit is successfully returned, the client will always > > see the new data from local cache. It seems this behavior is guaranteed by > > the order of transaction commit response and update notification for the > > same commit: the update notification always come BEFORE the response of the > > same commit. I didn't check ovsdb server code to verify. Please correct me > > if I am wrong. > > Yes, that's how it works. > > > If I am right, then I didn't see this order being specified in RFC 7047. > > Would this order be always guaranteed in ovsdb-server implementation? Is it > > better to be specified in RFC? > > I don't think that RFC 7047 states or implies the ordering. This is a > bug in the RFC, and I wish that it did say that. I don't think that > OVSDB is as useful without an ordering guarantee here.
Ben, thanks for your quick answer!
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
