Re: [aerogear-dev] Data Sync Thoughts

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote: > On 01/28/2014 12:13 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote: > >> On 01/28/2014 11:46 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 28, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> 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" >>> >> >> that is my impression as well, talking to Dan on IRC; >> ATM all is polling, but the sync-server will be cable of doing >> WebSocket/SockJS, so "connected" clients, can sync. >> >> Polling is MURDER on battery, performance, and "feel". WebSockets and >> SockJS are awesome ideas for a future implementation for "real time". >> > > As far as I understood it, the sync-server just started w/ polling > (pure HTTP). I think that WebSocket/SockJS is not really that far away, in > terms of 'future' > > >> >> >> Push should be really used for 'wake-up', instead of changing real >> information; Also SimplePush clients could not even integrate here (the >> protocol just uses version (or timestamps) >> >> Yes. >> >> On the topic of Simple Push, you push a URL so in theory you could push >> /Documents/${collecitonName}/${id}/${rev_id} and have simple push setup to >> accept URLS formatted that way right? Or is it more limited than that? >> > > you can simply ONLY push a version number, that's it > > I just reread things. It is worse than that. You can (should) only push > an increasing version number. So anything checksum based will fail. > best practice is 'timestamp' - that's all you can push over to those devices

> > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> > 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(a)lists.jboss.org >>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > aerogear-dev mailing list >>> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)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 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing listaerogear-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)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 > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing listaerogear-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)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