Re: [os-libsynthesis] resume + double Add
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 15:05 +, Patrick Ohly wrote: [...] So it seems that the engine does check for the remote ID, but only after having already added the item again. I think this was due to not enabling resumesupport. After setting that, the same test passes. Sorry for the confusion - I hadn't quite realized that suspend/resume was optional. Shouldn't the server have refused to resume with resumesupport off? Just wondering, we'll certainly turn it on now... -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. ___ os-libsynthesis mailing list os-libsynthesis@synthesis.ch http://lists.synthesis.ch/mailman/listinfo/os-libsynthesis
Re: [os-libsynthesis] resume + double Add
Hi Patrick,
On Mar 4, 2010, at 18:49 , Patrick Ohly wrote:
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 15:05 +, Patrick Ohly wrote:
[...]
So it seems that the engine does check for the remote ID, but only after
having already added the item again.
I think this was due to not enabling resumesupport. After setting
that, the same test passes. Sorry for the confusion - I hadn't quite
realized that suspend/resume was optional.
As said in the previous message, yes, for the server it is optional.
However, while tracking through the code I found that indeed in the server, the
case of a client sending duplicate Adds was not handled at all. So even with
resumesupport a repeated add from the client IMHO would have created a
duplicate in the server DB.
As most clients always send Replace (including libsynthesis not so long ago),
this case did not surface.
I now added a check for that in 3e687ddfca (server engine: added missing check
for re-sent Add during resume.)
Shouldn't the server have refused to resume with resumesupport off?
Yes. However, when you use a admin data plugin, dsResumeSupportedInDB() is
checking the API version of the plugin:
pluginapids.cpp:941:
/// returns true if DB implementation supports resume (saving of resume
marks, alert code, pending maps, tempGUIDs)
bool TPluginApiDS::dsResumeSupportedInDB(void)
{
if (fPluginDSConfigP-fDBApiConfig_Admin.Connected()) {
// we can do resume if plugin supports it
return
fPluginDSConfigP-fDBApiConfig_Admin.Version()=sInt32(VE_InsertMapItem);
}
return inherited::dsResumeSupportedInDB();
} // TPluginApiDS::dsResumeSupportedInDB
...and resumesupport is irrelevant (so what I said in the previous message is
not entirely correct - old plugins will AUTOMATICALLY disable resume;
resumesupport is only relevant for SQL backends).
So it's even stranger that enabling resumesupport should have made the tests
to pass now. ???
Lukas Zeller (l...@synthesis.ch)
-
Synthesis AG, SyncML Solutions Sustainable Software Concepts
i...@synthesis.ch, http://www.synthesis.ch
___
os-libsynthesis mailing list
os-libsynthesis@synthesis.ch
http://lists.synthesis.ch/mailman/listinfo/os-libsynthesis
Re: [os-libsynthesis] resume + double Add
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 23:49 +, Lukas Zeller wrote: On Mar 4, 2010, at 18:49 , Patrick Ohly wrote: On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 15:05 +, Patrick Ohly wrote: However, while tracking through the code I found that indeed in the server, the case of a client sending duplicate Adds was not handled at all. So even with resumesupport a repeated add from the client IMHO would have created a duplicate in the server DB. As most clients always send Replace (including libsynthesis not so long ago), this case did not surface. I now added a check for that in 3e687ddfca (server engine: added missing check for re-sent Add during resume.) Then my testing wasn't all in vain, even though it doesn't seem to be 100% reliable - see below. I'll continue testing with your patch included. ...and resumesupport is irrelevant (so what I said in the previous message is not entirely correct - old plugins will AUTOMATICALLY disable resume; resumesupport is only relevant for SQL backends). So it's even stranger that enabling resumesupport should have made the tests to pass now. ??? I also enable blob support, but that shouldn't be relevant for these tests. But I might have been wrong about it working: rerunning it shows that the results are not always reproducable. I need to look into that. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. ___ os-libsynthesis mailing list os-libsynthesis@synthesis.ch http://lists.synthesis.ch/mailman/listinfo/os-libsynthesis
