[aerogear-dev] Data Sync Thoughts
Summers Pittman
supittma at redhat.com
Wed Jan 29 03:31:02 EST 2014
On 01/29/2014 03:03 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com
> <mailto:supittma at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 01/28/2014 11:11 AM, Corinne Krych wrote:
>> I think we still need the synchronisation mode in pull mode.
>>
>> How are we going to deal with this use case with simple push:
>> UserA is offline update some data, then switch off his phone
>> Some other users update data
>> UserA open his app, he has missed some push notifications but
>> still want to sync his app.
> That is the magic of Push systems. He gets the messages when he
> comes online.
>
> Device A and B and Server have data with a checksum of 42.
> Device A goes offline.
> Device A changes its data and has a checksum of 64.
> Device B changes its data and has a checksum of 192.
> Device B sends the expected server checksum of 42 and its new data
> to the server.
> Server accepts B's Data, updates its checksum to 192, and sends a
> message to all Devices ( in this case just A)
>
>
> sending the data does not work via 'mobile push' - we need something
> like 'real-time' for that sending;
Well it does work with GCM. In this example I was specifically thinking
about using a Pipe to send data. Honestly that is an implementation
detail and can be hand waved in any number of ways.
>
>
> Device B and Server go on a long date, but things don't work out
> and they end up splitting the check 50/50. Device B is annoyed
> because she only got a salad but Server got the Surf and Turf.
>
> Device A comes online and receives a message from the server.
> Device A notices the server's checksum data is a change from 42 ->
> 192 and not 42 -> 64. Thus its copy is out of sync and fires a
> message to the User of Device A to resolve the data.
> User A resolves the data and Device A sends the merged data to the
> server.
> Device B gets a message of new data and updates to what the server
> has.
>
>
>>
>> ++
>> Corinne
>>
>>
>> On 28 January 2014 17:01, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com
>> <mailto:supittma at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 01/28/2014 10:58 AM, Lucas Holmquist wrote:
>> > On Jan 28, 2014, at 10:54 AM, Summers Pittman
>> <supittma at redhat.com <mailto: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 <mailto: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 )
>> 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".
>>
>> 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 at lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > aerogear-dev mailing list
>> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto: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 list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20140129/4d3d9ace/attachment-0001.html
More information about the aerogear-dev
mailing list