-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 4/21/09 1:36 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 4/21/09 11:43 AM, Robin Collier wrote: > >> Well, I will be enabling (2) with the application I am building (I >> thought that one might be somewhat contentious). Although I think there >> will be other use cases where published items will only be relevant >> during the time when the user who published them is still present. > >> In my own case, we are using a pubsub node to notify users of an >> application of what other users are doing, if they are interested. The >> interest level is typically determined by whether the users are in the >> same group. It's basically a near real time state update to relevant >> parties. (It would be even better if I could utilize collection nodes >> as well, but that part of the spec is too immature at this point.) > > Purging the node when the node owner (presumably the *only* node owner) > goes offline might be appropriate for certain kinds of extended presence > applications. I have no deep objections to defining a node configuration > option for that feature, I was just wondering about the use cases and > whether this kind of thing would need to be enabled on a per-node basis > (I think the answer is probably yes, since it depends on the payload type).
I've added a purge_offline node configuration option for this. >> I am somewhat surprised that the 1st item is not already part of the >> spec, as I see it as much more desirable than max_items, the only >> current option for limiting the volume stored. I would think that for >> most multi user applications, determining a hard value for the number of >> items you wish to keep would be more difficult than determining at what >> time they are no longer relevant. > > This is typically a service-wide configuration option, not a per-node > configuration option (e.g., the admin of your pubsub service decrees > that nodes shall not contain items more than 30 days old as a form of > garbage collection). Why exactly does this need to be a per-node option? It's still not clear to me if we need a per-node option for this, but I suppose it's fine since we already have max_items. Thoughts? /psa -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkquuIkACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzbDwCgqwlOLB6L3yPDcV3/0En9bnm1 684AoLkW3lfk1P6KPdiTBLoBMNRrIx0n =MdyS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
