On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:26 AM, Adam Kocoloski wrote: > On Mar 5, 2010, at 2:17 PM, Randall Leeds wrote: > >> Now seems like a good time to raise this issue: >> >> Right now the replication code assumes sequence tokens from the source >> are integers and I think this is wrong. It prevents replication from >> the Lounge, but beyond my personal interest there it feels to me like >> it should be an opaque token. It's necessary to know their arrival >> order so that it's clear what the highest fully replicated seq is when >> making checkpoints. Enumerating these tokens and zipping them in >> tuples means they can be compared as before but without making >> assumptions about the type of the tokens themselves. >> >> Before I set about on the patch, how would people feel about a change >> like this? The format of the actual checkpoint document won't change >> (only the HighSeq calculations in the replication code and some >> zipping/unzipping in places). >> >> Randall > > Absolutely, I didn't realize the replicator actually failed if the seqnum was > not an integer. Preserving the arrival order of the tokens is a good thing. > Best,
The same change may need to be accounted for in the view engine as well. I'll wait to see the code before I have an opinion about suitability for 1.0 Chris > > Adam >
