[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-4747?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
ASF GitHub Bot updated ZOOKEEPER-4747: -------------------------------------- Labels: pull-request-available (was: ) > Java api lacks synchronous version of sync() call > ------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ZOOKEEPER-4747 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-4747 > Project: ZooKeeper > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: java client > Reporter: Kezhu Wang > Assignee: Kezhu Wang > Priority: Major > Labels: pull-request-available > Fix For: 3.10.0 > > Time Spent: 10m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > Ideally, it should be redundant just as what [~breed] says in ZOOKEEPER-1167. > {quote} > it wasn't an oversight. there is no reason for a synchronous version. because > of the ordering guarantees, if you issue an asynchronous sync, the next call, > whether synchronous or asynchronous will see the updated state. > {quote} > But in case of connection loss and absent of ZOOKEEPER-22, client has to > check result of asynchronous sync before next call. So, currently, we can't > simply issue an fire-and-forget asynchronous sync and an read to gain strong > consistent. Then in a synchronous call chain, client has to convert > asynchronous {{sync}} to synchronous to gain strong consistent. This is what > I do in > [EagerACLFilterTest::syncClient|https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/blob/f42c01de73867ffbc12707b3e9f9cd7f847fe462/zookeeper-server/src/test/java/org/apache/zookeeper/server/quorum/EagerACLFilterTest.java#L98], > it is apparently unfriendly to end users. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)