Hmmm... doesn't that just push the problem farther downstream? An ingest
involves several changes to storage, as Steve pointed out, and any one of them
may fail, which should invalidate the whole batch of changes. And if the swap
fails on one or more of the changes? We're right back where we
My feeling is that a lot could be gained by writing changes to a temp file
and only swapping it into place if successful.
Michael
On Nov 16, 2011 3:26 PM, "Stephen Bayliss" <
stephen.bayl...@acuityunlimited.net> wrote:
> **
> This is following on from a conversation we had at yesterday's committe
(resending as this didn't seem to get through the first time)
This is following on from a conversation we had at yesterday's committer
meeting where Eddie mentioned he had a scenario with some ingests failing
under heavy load leading to potential inconsistences eg between the registry
and the obj
This is following on from a conversation we had at yesterday's committer
meeting where Eddie mentioned he had a scenario with some ingests failing
under heavy load leading to potential inconsistences eg between the registry
and the object and datastream store.
I think there are two separate types
