[aerogear-dev] Data Sync Thoughts

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com>wrote:

>  On 01/28/2014 12:13 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com>wrote:
>
>>  On 01/28/2014 11:46 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com>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"
>>>
>>
>>  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 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing listaerogear-dev at lists.jboss.orghttps://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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing listaerogear-dev at lists.jboss.orghttps://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/20140128/2a587ed0/attachment.html