[aerogear-dev] Data Sync Thoughts

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com>wrote:

> On 01/28/2014 10:58 AM, Lucas Holmquist wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 2014, at 10:54 AM, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 01/28/2014 10:48 AM, Lucas Holmquist wrote:
> >>> On Jan 28, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 01/28/2014 09:36 AM, Lucas Holmquist wrote:
> >>>>> yup, this is another Data Sync thread,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>  From a client side perspective, i have concerns that there is
> still not a clear direction yet.
> >>>>> I know there are multiple ideas floating around on what our model
> should be,  i'm all for choice, but what about deciding on 1 model to get
> started with.  Then later once we have this nailed down,  we can have other
> "adapters" with different models perhaps
> >>>> All the data model is is an envelope of sync metadata around an object
> >>>> right?
> >>> right
> >>>
> >>>> We also need to think about the API and server/client protocol as
> well.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think that for sync 1.0 we could focus on the following behavior (it
> >>>> worked for my demos at least)
> >>>>
> >>>> 1.  We have a Sync factory similar to Pipeline, Authenticator,
> >>>> Registrar, and KeyService.
> >>>> 2.  The Sync factory consumes/manages Synchronizer instances.
> >>>> 3.  AG Synchronizer listens for sync messages using UnifiedPush
> endpoints.
> >>> i thought for a 1.0 we weren't thinking about "realtime"
> >> When I hear realtime I think sub 100 ms updates to all clients. (think
> >> gaming)
> >>
> >> What I thought we were going for was something closer to email.  The
> >> data gets changed and at some point in the future the client knows. More
> >> specifically, the thing the ONE thing that makes sync special is it is a
> >> push instead of poll implementation.
> > this makes sense,  but i guess it would be push when available. thinking
> web and crappy web socket support( dang you carriers )
> Right.  I'm not saying lets do something complicated.  I'm saying lets
> use GCM, iOS CM, and simple push to send notifications to tell the
> client something.  In simplePush case it is "this data changed, get the
> new stuff and update yourself".  In Android and iOS case it may be that
> or it may be "here is new data".
>

even iOS is _very_ limited in terms of payload.

In Android you can push entire books :-), but not w/ iOS, nor w/ SimplePush


>
> In general, I am fine for getting a message saying something like
> Documents/Schedules/1/${revision}.  Then I can check my revisions, fetch
> data if necessary, update my local data, and send any updates.  That
> SHOULD (I think) be doable with simplepush as well right?
>
> >
> >>>> 4.  AG Synchronizer sends sync messages using Pipes
> >>>> 5.  AG Synchronizer holds local data in a store
> >>>>
> >>>> 6.  When AGSynchronizer gets a message it is responsible for updating
> >>>> the Store and then notifying code listing for updates OR for notifying
> >>>> the code that an error has occurred and needs to be addressed.
> >>>>
> >>>> 7.  When the developer updates data in the store, the synchronizer
> >>>> should package that data and send it to the server.  The synchronizer
> is
> >>>> responsible for error handling, retrying, back-off, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> 8.  We should include multiple synchronizer implementations to deal
> with
> >>>> multiple very simple use cases which involve legacy systems. (For
> >>>> instance polling to load static data on a schedule.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Thoughts? Tomatoes?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> 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
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20140128/daf44ee4/attachment-0001.html