Re: [aerogear-dev] Data Sync Thoughts

On 01/28/2014 11:49 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote: > On 01/28/2014 10:58 AM, Lucas Holmquist wrote: > > On Jan 28, 2014, at 10:54 AM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt; > wrote: > > > >> On 01/28/2014 10:48 AM, Lucas Holmquist 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" > >> 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 Android is still limited to 4K I think.

I am fine with designing around the limitations of 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(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 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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