> 
> i am not too familiar with the sync mechanism... but looking just
> quickly at the code it seems that it persists the sync of each user/group.
> that looks reasonable to me (even if it comes with some Root.commit()
> overhead) as it allows to specifically retry or revert the changes
> made during the sync of one single account. that's the defensive
> way of minimising the unexpected behaviour for the consumer in case
> of failure.
> 
> on the other hand you might argue that the default should be success
> and that in those cases less frequent calls to persist the changes
> might work as well and was probably faster.
mmm interesting, yeah i might argue that :-) and that we could probably in case 
of an error “replay” user/group sync persisting one by one, 
from the last successful save. Will have a look.

Thanks a lot,
Nicolas

Reply via email to