I agree that the wording around persistDuration could be
made a little more explicit.
The reason for the vagueness is that persistDuration is
only the minimum value that the party will keep this
information around (so that it can filter duplicates, etc),
not necessarily a trigger to purge the information.
It is not the intent to specify the explicit behavior, beyond
the constraint that the information be perserved for at least
the time indicated in persistDuration. Implementations need
some degree of latitude as to how they will effect their
"garbage collection" of resources no longer necessary to the
effective execution of the MSH.
Cheers,
Chris
Dan Weinreb wrote:
>
> When a receiving MSH is responsible for eliminating duplicates, it
> does so by comparing the messageId of an incoming message with a set
> of messageId's of messages that it has already received. When can a
> receiving MSH remove a messageId from this set (so that it will not
> grow forever)? I was unable to find any discussion of this in the MS
> document (I'm looking at Message Service Specification, Version 1.0,
> 11 May 2001). I am pretty sure that persistDuration parameter
> controls this (I believe Chris Ferris said so in recent mail, too).
> I'd like to suggest that it would be good if the MS spec came right
> out and said this explicitly.
>
> Thanks.
> -- Dan
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to:
