Concurrent editing and merging changes
When you allow multiple users to edit an access control policy, you have two choices:
-
Have users lock the policy when editing it. This ensures that a single user at a time can make changes. Using locking, you never have to worry about lost or conflicting changes. However, it limits your ability to respond quickly to unexpected events, especially if a user leaves the policy locked while out of the office. For more information about locking policies, see Locking an access control policy.
-
Allow users to simultaneously edit the policy. If more than one user has made unsaved edits at a given time, the first user who saves the policy gets all of their changes saved. Other users are immediately notified of the save, and must then merge their changes. The rest of this topic explains this approach.
Note | If you are using change management, where edits are done within the scope of a ticket, the ticket locks the policy and concurrent editing is not possible. |
Before you begin
To limit the amount of merging you have to do, save the policy early and often.
Procedure
Step 1 | Determine if other users are also editing the policy. When you edit an access control policy, look for the following message banner at the top of the page:
This message indicates that the named user (there might be more than one) currently have the policy open for edit. | ||
Step 2 | Watch for notifications that another user saved changes and take action. The following banner message indicates another user saved changes and you need to take immediate action:
Click one of the following links:
| ||
Step 3 | Merge changes. When you click the Merge option, a merge window opens with a summary of the total number of observed differences between your edits and the last user’s saved edits. No other user’s unsaved edits are included. Observations include direct conflicts and informational notifications.
| ||
Step 4 | Once the merger is complete, you can either save the policy immediately or continue editing it. Saving the policy might reduce the impact of future merges. |