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

Support Mem-only durability for sync #4432

Closed
sync-by-unito bot opened this issue Feb 17, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #5955
Closed

Support Mem-only durability for sync #4432

sync-by-unito bot opened this issue Feb 17, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #5955
Assignees

Comments

@sync-by-unito
Copy link

sync-by-unito bot commented Feb 17, 2021

Core config has a durability setting:

    enum class Durability : uint16_t {
        Full,
        MemOnly,
        Async ///< Not yet supported on windows.
    };

Use different durability setting to open the same Realm file will cause a core crash:

Durability setting (as passed to the SharedGroup constructor) was not consistent across the session

But sync client is always open Realm file with Durability::Full. That prevents bindings to give user the option to use MemOnly which is allowed for non-sync Realm.

Is it a restriction from sync or a bug?

related java issue: realm/realm-java#4957


The problem is that when sync is enabled, one cannot use "mem only" durability setting when opening Realm files, because that conflicts with the default durability setting used by the sync client. Realm requires that all participants of a file access session uses the same durability setting.

Support for using "mem only" durability inside sync client could easily be implemented.

@sync-by-unito
Copy link
Author

sync-by-unito bot commented Oct 19, 2022

➤ Jonathan Reams commented:

This was fixed in #4839

@jbreams jbreams linked a pull request Oct 19, 2022 that will close this issue
3 tasks
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 21, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant