Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Session token and transactional batch #1567

Closed
mwikstrom opened this issue May 27, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1870
Closed

Session token and transactional batch #1567

mwikstrom opened this issue May 27, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1870
Assignees
Labels
Batch Batch related issue

Comments

@mwikstrom
Copy link

mwikstrom commented May 27, 2020

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I want to keep session consistency up to date when using transactional batch.

Describe the solution you'd like
I'd like the transactional batch operation to accept a session token (perhaps via an options construct similar to other operations) and then return an updated session token in its response.

Describe alternatives you've considered
If one really need to ensure that session consistency is up to date after executing a transactional batch operation the only option I've come up with is to:

  1. Execute the batch
  2. Capture one of the new item's ETag and Timestamp
  3. Query container with current session token repeatedly until the new ETag is visible or a greater Timestamp is observed

In most cases this will incur a single extra round trip but could potentially require many extra round trips.

@j82w
Copy link
Contributor

j82w commented May 27, 2020

@abhijitpai can you please take a look?

@j82w j82w added the Batch Batch related issue label May 27, 2020
@abhijitpai abhijitpai assigned rakkuma and unassigned abhijitpai May 27, 2020
@mwikstrom
Copy link
Author

Any news on this issue?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Batch Batch related issue
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants