[aerogear-dev] Data Sync Thoughts

[Lucas Holmquist]

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 )

> 
>> 
>>> 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