[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1167?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13932459#comment-13932459
]
Marshall McMullen commented on ZOOKEEPER-1167:
----------------------------------------------
[~michim] - I'm not sure I agree. Ben's comments specifically state that this
is not strictly required for the consistency protocol ZK provides. But if you
are communicating through some other mechanism and you want to guarantee those
two clients are synchronized, then this would be useful. Granted the
application layer can provide it's own wrapper around zoo_async to provide this
functionality. So I think the use case is for easier integration into higher
level clients. That and consistency since this is the only non-sync API in the
C bindings. I'm still happy to add tests around this and also add a java
implementation I just lost sight of this case.
> C api lacks synchronous version of sync() call.
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ZOOKEEPER-1167
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1167
> Project: ZooKeeper
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: c client
> Affects Versions: 3.3.3, 3.4.3, 3.5.0
> Reporter: Nicholas Harteau
> Assignee: Marshall McMullen
> Fix For: 3.5.0
>
> Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-1167.patch
>
>
> Reading through the source, the C API implements zoo_async() which is the
> zookeeper sync() method implemented in the multithreaded/asynchronous C API.
> It doesn't implement anything equivalent in the non-multithreaded API.
> I'm not sure if this was oversight or intentional, but it means that the
> non-multithreaded API can't guarantee consistent client views on critical
> reads.
> The zkperl bindings depend on the synchronous, non-multithreaded API so also
> can't call sync() currently.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
