As a result of network interruption during script execution, some of the remote devices never received the ccCopyEntryRowStatus "destroy", so I assume that field remains set to createAnd*. Would there be any danger leaving that "as is", especially considering the next execution will again attempt to set it to createAnd*? On the flip side, what happens if ccCopyEntryRowStatus receives "destroy" when it's not set (or would that be the "notInService(2)" state)?
There is no danger. Assuming your next run of the script will do a destroy before trying to reset row objects, you will be fine. Of course, if you're worried about it, you can always send a destory after the fact, and clean things up now.
Is it to say I could summarily issue a blind "destroy" upfront regardless, as a "best practice"?
To restate my original question: Is there any [adverse] impact if ccCopyEntryRowStatus that's left in "createAndWait" state receives another "createAndWait" directive immediately after?
No, that won't work. If a row is in a createAndWait state, it must be set to active, not createAndGo.
Getting Started
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community:
