[aerogear-dev] Data Sync Thoughts

Douglas Campos qmx at qmx.me
Wed Jan 29 09:24:46 EST 2014


On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 09:14:20AM -0500, Summers Pittman wrote:
> On 01/29/2014 07:43 AM, Bruno Oliveira wrote:
> >My 2 non technical cents, I really think we should separate "push" from
> >"sync" and integrate later,  bet on simple. In my opinion we are just
> >adding one more level of complexity.
> >
> >For example: would be perfect to add digital signatures, encrypted data
> >for that storage and all the sick things from security. But that would add
> >an extra level of complexity which would lead us to several months of
> >development.
> >
> >Is just my opinion, but if you guys think that we REALLY need Push, MVP or
> >whatever atm, that's fine.
> Then what we are talking about is no longer sync.  It is revision control.

Well, what if I the developer want to download the files from Dropbox
API and do the sync locally? (YNAB app works like this)

It still is sync, at least from my POV

> >
> >
> >On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:03 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org
> ><mailto:matzew at apache.org>> 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;
> >
> >
> >        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 <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >    https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-- 
> >
> >-- 
> >"The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
> >-
> >@abstractj
> >-
> >Volenti Nihil Difficile
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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


-- 
qmx


More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list