So you were updating a directory but serving another directory ?
But then updating the right last-modified page people were seeing ?
It probably would have updated an unpublished last-modified as well.
For a similar issue, in appengine, I had duplicate File objects in the
database, and always served the one that GQL happened to return first.
In that case, both last-modified and the checksum might update correctly,
but still, the wrong file might get served.
I am not sure why we're having this discussion since it's
implementation details, but it's fun :)
I'm still trying to prove my claim that it's not feasible to increase
the trustworthiness of a mirror by computing some kind of checksum.
If the mirror has some systematic or random error, it may well be that
the checksum is as-expected, yet the mirror is inconsistent.
If there's interest I can write a multiprocess-based script that
keeps a md5 database up-to-date
That's besides the point. The question is whether doing so would practically
help to improve the consistency, and I believe the answer is: no. It may help
to increase people's trust (which is a subjective manner), which may be
worthwhile itself, but may also backfire if they download inconsistent files
despite the mirror giving "proof" that it is consistent.
Regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
Catalog-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
