Thus said "Andy Bradford" on 24 Jun 2014 00:39:20 -0600: > Perhaps the cluster rotation mechanism is rotating out clusters faster > than clients are able to consume them in this scenario? So clients > that update infrequently will miss some clusters which will exist in > the unclustered table for as long as they don't get cycled off.
Never mind. There should always be at least one cluster in the igot list that a server publishes in response to a pull, and the client should be able to follow the cluster chain at that point, which means there must simply be some artifacts missing from clusters (as the test-cluster reveals). Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000000053a91f34 _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
