On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Matt W. Benjamin<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ----- "Tom Keiser" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Matt W. Benjamin<[email protected]>
>> >
[snip]
>> Additionally, I really think we should assert our current DV as an IN
>> param to allow future implementations to do offset mapping should
>> they
>> so desire (and offset should become INOUT as a result).
>
> Ok.  I assumed the client might abort the listing if it discovered that dv
> had changed, we'll need a way for the server to inform the client it can 
> continue
> a coherent listing, I think.
>

Actually, I think I see a good opportunity to reduce the messaging
complexity of afs3: drop an XCB notification vector (and probably a
"you're caught up now" flag) as an OUT parameter on the RPC.  A file
server implementing XCB async delivery semantics would then have the
_option_ of delivering a subset of queued notifications, thus
potentially eliminating a second round trip, and hopefully eliminating
the posited desire for aborts.  If this works out as well as I suspect
it will, we might eventually want to add such an OUT parameter to many
of the afsint RPCs.

-Tom

_______________________________________________
AFS3-standardization mailing list
[email protected]
http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization

Reply via email to