Le lundi 7 janvier 2019, 21:00:42 CET Evgeny a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:28 PM, Goffi wrote:
> > Are you talking about the fact that "date of modification" (as
> > defined in the protoXEP) could be out of sync between clusters?
>
> No, from the discussion I thought you want to have
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:28 PM, Goffi wrote:
Are you talking about the fact that "date of modification" (as
defined in the protoXEP) could be out of sync between clusters?
No, from the discussion I thought you want to have something like
incremental
unique "order" attribute in the node.
And
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 11:30:26AM +0300, Evgeny wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:44 AM, Goffi wrote:
> > Is there any implementation in the wild which would have issue with node
> > order?
>
> Sure, any clustered database will have issues with
> such naive approach: after partitioning during
Hi Jonas,
Le lundi 7 janvier 2019, 18:08:25 CET Jonas Schäfer a écrit :
> On Sonntag, 6. Januar 2019 15:16:43 CET Jonas Schäfer wrote:
> > Title: Order-By
> > Abstract:
> > This specification allows to change order of items retrieval in a
> > Pubsub or MAM query
>
> Couple notes:
>
> - The
Hi Evgeny,
Le lundi 7 janvier 2019, 09:30:26 CET Evgeny a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:44 AM, Goffi wrote:
> > Is there any implementation in the wild which would have issue with
> > node order?
>
> Sure, any clustered database will have issues with
> such naive approach: after
On Sonntag, 6. Januar 2019 15:16:43 CET Jonas Schäfer wrote:
> Title: Order-By
> Abstract:
> This specification allows to change order of items retrieval in a
> Pubsub or MAM query
Couple notes:
- The strings for the "modification" and "creation" fields (as used in the
element) should be URNs,
On Sonntag, 6. Januar 2019 22:14:59 CET Maxime Buquet wrote:
> Hi Standards,
>
> I had the opportunity to discuss with people interested in at
> the 35C3.
>
> The current state of is not ideal, it is pretty much ephemeral,
> and I Ge0rG has been working on it, and we've been discussing it at
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:44 AM, Goffi wrote:
Is there any implementation in the wild which would have issue with
node order?
Sure, any clustered database will have issues with
such naive approach: after partitioning during merge
you'll end up with duplicated orders, like 2 items
with
