[aerogear-dev] Feedback for aerogear-unifiedpush-server - personalized push notifications case

Matthias Wessendorf matzew at apache.org
Mon Sep 30 09:47:28 EDT 2013


+1


On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com>wrote:

>
> On Sep 27, 2013, at 7:55 AM, Kris Borchers <kris at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> There is already work being done to look into handling "batch" messaging
> for SimplePush. It's easier for SimplePush because we control the push
> network so we can add that type of functionality. For the other networks
> though, if they can't accept multiple push messages in a single batch,
> you're still going to have to loop over them all and do those sends. With
> that in mind, IMO this should only be added if the push networks can handle
> it. Otherwise, this idea seems like it is going to muddy the waters in
> terms of mixing business logic into the UP server which we definitely don't
> want to do.
>
> +1, no mixing
>
>
> Again, IMO, if you are sending out several hundred thousand personalized
> messages via push, you're probably doing it wrong and need to reconsider
> the way your app is structured. Push messaging is not a mass e-mail system.
>
>
> exactly
>
>
> On Sep 27, 2013, at 2:12 AM, Apostolos Emmanouilidis <aemmanou at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>  I received some feedback for the aerogear-unifiedpush-server.
>
> The case is:
>
> Company X would like to create a personalized push notifications campaign
> for Y hundred thousands customers/clients. Personalized means that each
> client/device should receive a unique message. The messages are
> automatically produced from rules defined in a CRM system, but this is
> something which doesn't affect our implementation.
>
> Currently, our selective send method is able to send one message to a
> selected list of clients. In cases like the above one, this translates into
> Y hundred thousands calls of the aerogear-unifiedpush-server selective send
> method. The question is whether we could change the signature of the
> selective send method and allow to pass an array of messages or not.
>
> In my understanding, the advantages/disadvantages of a such change are
> similar to the advantages/disadvantages of a service according its level of
> granularity.
>
> *Fine Grained*
> + simplicity and less business logic on server side
> + less amount of data exchanged between client/server
> - a lot of interactions between client/server
> - more interactions = more network overhead
> - complex client side
>
> *Coarse Grained*
> + less interactions between client/server
> + less network overhead & possibility of re-using the same network
> connection to send messages to the Push Networks (at least for APN)
> + simple client side
> - much data exchanged in each interaction between client/server
> - complex server side
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130930/02bb3c1d/attachment.html 


More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list