[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1909?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13965200#comment-13965200
 ] 

Rakesh R commented on ZOOKEEPER-1909:
-------------------------------------

bq. Yeah that is fine as well, but even if a client-side impl doesn't do that - 
the server should do the check
OK, so this is like good to have validation in server side. Can we add test 
case in server side alone, like in DataTreeTest.java or in somother place ?

> removeWatches doesn't return NOWATCHER when there is no watch set
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1909
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1909
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: server
>    Affects Versions: 3.5.0
>            Reporter: Raul Gutierrez Segales
>             Fix For: 3.5.0
>
>         Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-1909.patch
>
>
> ZOOKEEPER-442 introduced support for a new opcode: removeWatches. The way it 
> was implemented though, implies that you need to check on the client side if 
> a watch/watcher is set *before* you send your request to the server. If you 
> don't, ZK will just swallow your request and won't return an error code if 
> there isn't a watch set for that path.
> I noticed this whilst implementing removeWatches for Kazoo [1]. As mentioned, 
> I guess it could be expected that clients should do the check on their side 
> but I think that the correct thing would to have the server do the validation 
> and return the error code accordingly as well.
> [~rakeshr], [~phunt]: thoughts?
> [1] 
> https://github.com/rgs1/kazoo/commit/44ca48e975aeea3fd0664fe13136a72caf89e54f



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to