On 26 Feb, 2007, at 14:42, Morgen Sagen wrote:
On Feb 26, 2007, at 2:32 PM, Jeffrey Harris wrote:
Grant and I discussed several ways of fixing this. We could doing
share
restore in parallel, and instead queue up all the collections to be
subscribed to. This would slow down share restore, but would lead to
fewer merge errors.
I think this also means never having more than one sharing
operation going at any given time, including background syncs, and
subscribes, right?
Well, it can still happen in the (probably) rare case where the user
changes an item "at the same time as" a background sync, and the main
thread's refresh runs into a conflict.
--Grant
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
