On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 12:22:24PM -0700, Roopa Prabhu wrote: > all great points. My only reason to explore RTM_DELNEIGH is to see if we can > find a recipe to support similar bulk deletes of other objects handled via > rtm msgs in the future. Plus, it allows you to maintain symmetry between > flush requests and object delete notification msg types. > > Lets see if there are other opinions. I guess I should have read the entire thread. :-) (still getting used to the new lei + mutt workflow). This was my thought - bulk delete is going to be a common need, and it is really just a mass delete. The GET message types are used for dumps and some allow attributes on the request as a means of coarse grain filtering. I think we should try something similar here for the flush case.
