Re: [provision] Batch Capability.

[Gary P Cole <Gary.P.Cole@Sun.COM>]

I think we should separate issue #1 (batch) from issue#2 (async). 
Let me restate *just* the batch capability capability question:

Should 'batch' be a required operation?

Right now 'batch' is part of the core (which de facto makes it 
required), but it doesn't really have to be part of the core.  It's not 
a *basic* operation (like 'add', 'modify', 'delete', or 'lookup') and 
it's not a *bootstrap* operation (like 'listTargets').  It's an 
operation that wraps multiple (batchable) requests in a single request.

I think we should move the 'batch' operation to a Batch Capability (for 
the same reasons that we moved 'search' to the Search Capability).  The 
'batch' operation imposes a fair amount of complexity on the provider, 
and should be optional.
1) The 'batch' operation requires that the provider order nested results 
within its response (to correspond with the order of the requests within 
the original request).
2) The batch operation also also allows the requestor to specify 
"processingType" as either "sequential" or "parallel".

gpc

Jeff Larson wrote:

> Darran Rolls wrote:
>
>> So in summary, the proposal is to
>>
>> 1) Move Batch to an optional capability
>> 2) Make core operations synchronous and async functionality a 
>> separate capability that can be applied to it?
>
>
> I was liking this, but then I remembered some issues that were 
> "resolved" at the last
> F2F I attended involving workflow.