On Tue, 2014-07-29 at 14:38 +0005, Khurshid Alam wrote: > Hi, > > > Which one will act as client & which one as server? > > It doesn't matter in this case. Usually it is more efficient to use > > the DB which can be accessed more quickly on the server side. > > > What I meant was that which one would be "remote" & which one would be > "local".
Your choice. It doesn't matter here, because both sides are equally "far away" (or near). > If one calendar is read-only I may want to perform a one-way > sync(--sync one-way-from-remote). Technically, whichever context is > used with "taget-config", is treated as "remote" in syncevolution. Is > that same here? Yes. "remote" is just a matter of perspective here. It means "not the side used for starting the sync" more than it means "expensive to access" or "on a different machine". "remote" and "local" have nothing to do with the direction of the data transfer. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.syncevolution.org/mailman/listinfo/syncevolution
