>what java client was used?

There is an Java client for sync[1] which was used for the Android demo[2]

[1] https://github.com/danbev/aerogear-sync-server/tree/differential-synchronization/diffsync/client-netty

[2] https://github.com/danbev/android-diffsync-demo

>on our sync-server, can't have have different "endpoints" (e.g. xmpp, websocket), that all connect to its heart, the Netty-based DiffSync engine?

This is what I had in mind when a wrote my comment about making the XMPP into a handler.

It would not have to be tied to Netty, but we could use the XMPP server from within Netty and make sure that it get separate threading etc. 

On 14 October 2014 09:46, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Summers Pittman <supittma@redhat.com> wrote:

TL;DR; Watch this repo over the next few days :

https://github.com/secondsun/aerogear-sync-server/tree/xmpp-diff-sync

Currently I am researching integrating the sync client technology that
DanBev, LolQuist et al have been working on into Android all proper
like.  Danbev wrote a POC demo a while ago* which uses the Java
websocket client. 

what java client was used?

 

This seems to work "OK" but there is a lot of work
getting websockets working right on Android. 

+1 

 

However, Google has a two
way messaging protocol built into Google Play Services on top of GCM.
This is the technology I am trying to introduce to the sync systems in
this branch.

This branch includes a fork of the server library and a fork of the
client library which interact with GCM on the client and XMPP on the
server side.  Right now it compiles and not much else.  However, because
the server is decoupled from the connection handling, adding in the
correct hooks has been rather simple.  There are going to be some issues
to hammer out once this gets past "compiling" and makes it into "demoable".

First, the server does not receive implicit connect/disconnect messages
from Google per device.  Google does send Ack/Nack messages however so
with some bookkeeping connections/shadows/etc can be properly
maintained.    There is a similar mechanism on the client side; however,
we may need to expand the sync protocol to include some kind of heartbeat.

Second, the sync server isn't multitenant.  This means that until we
figure out how to merge, things listening to WebSockets don't hear
things listening to XMPP or see updates from one to the other.

on our sync-server, can't have have different "endpoints" (e.g. xmpp, websocket),

that all connect to its heart, the Netty-based DiffSync engine?

 

Finally, Google Play Services is not FOSS by any stretch of the
imagination.  However, having a single connection managed by the OS is
great for usability, speed of development, battery life, etc so I feel
like this is more getting mileage out of the chunk of my soul I tossed
in the black Googley shredder for UPS and less of a deal breaker.

not sure I follow here

 

As I've said right now, today, this code is work in progress.  Soon it
will be proof of concept and we can discuss how to work around these
issues and merge the ideas back into mainline.

looking forward to that. 

 

--
Summers Pittman
>>Phone:404 941 4698
>>Java is my crack.

PS: WebSocket's biggest problems are maintaining connections and
performing message redelivery in a sporatic connection scenario. This is
one of those things which is a lot of work to get right both on our end
as service providers and on the developer's end as consumers.
Additionally, Android L is going to include a lot more end user
configurability which will affect when/how messages are delivered. 

any link to share?

 

To
do WebSockets right we will have to respect those settings as well.  It
is my assumption (we all know what that means) that Google Play Services
will correctly enforce data/power settings out of the box as well as
correctly maintain messaging connections and delivery.

instead of having our Android lib do a WS connection (including all the required work for maintaining etc), we could leverage the XMPP from GCM.

That's the prefered route you are suggesting, right ? 

ANDROID   <----> GCM <------> Sync-Server

This would allow us, to do more than we do atm on "pure" push notifications, via GCM. In this scenario we can do a two way communication:

Android client can send data to Sync-Server (via GCM), and receive "diff" from the server, via GCM.

-Matthias

 

_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@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 list
aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev