As a CN, a mechanism will need to refresh the entire holdings of a member node
A MN may need to indicate to a coordinating node that its entire collections should be synchronized. Default synchronization of CNs will only took at the time-period since the last synchronization occurred. However, if an event occurs on the MN that inserts records with create dates before the last synchronization period, the collection on the CN may not be complete.
A CN may also take the initiative and run a background process that checks all the objects on a MN and compare them to CN holdings.
#2 Updated by Matthew Jones about 11 years ago
In a production environment, this is a dangerous operation. MNs really shouldn't be able to wholesale replace objects that they've previously registered with new objects that use the same GUIDs, and this would violate GUID contracts and our ability to replicate content effectively. It seems that would be the main purpose of this operation, and therefore is something we probably should not support. What is the use case for a MN to be replacing all of its content (outside of, e.g., warez sites, etc)?
#15 Updated by Bruce Wilson about 7 years ago
per discussion 2014-10-02 at AHM: Document this (via ask.dataone.org and operations documentation). The MN should send an email (e.g. to email@example.com). An operations staff person will contact the MN to validate and then manually update the last harvest date. This task is rare enough and potentially expensive enough to execute that it does not need to be automated.