Michael, as long as you, Ari and Joseph can make it, and the scheduling tool said that you can, I think that we'll have the core of the discussion. The objective is not to put on a show as much as it is to get the core OT thinkers driving the discussion. Let the ideas drive the interest.
BTW, I shifted it up a half your, I have a telecon that starts at 12.30. Consider this a kickoff event - let's shoot for somewhere south of an hour's worth of very productive conversation and then let's start thinking about how to keep the conversations going at a very productive level on a more regular basis. I am also totally for more impromptu efforts, but for the sake of the community if we can post our conversations for community-wide access, that can help. Best Regards, John Blossom President Shore Communications Inc. where content, technology and people meet. (Salesmark of Shore Communications Inc.) web: shore.com blog: contentblogger.com email: jblos...@shore.com phone: 203.293.8511 fax: 203.663.8259 twitter: jblossom <https://twitter.com/jblossom> google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom LinkedIn: John Blossom <http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnblossom> facebook: John Blossom skype: jblossom On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Michael MacFadden < michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > John, > > Again I don't mean to delay the effort. But looking at the attendee > responses, I only see one person on the list that has agreed to attend that > has really been heavily working OT issues in the last year or so (Joseph). > So I am not sure what the objectives or the outcome of the meeting will be > with such low participation from OT experts. > > By no means do I mean to diminish any one else's capabilities, but if the > intention is to really dig in to OT, then I think we night need additional > participation to be successful. > > ~Michael > > On Jul 23, 2013, at 8:40 AM, "John Blossom - Shore Communications Inc." < > jblos...@shore.com> wrote: > > > I agree wholeheartedly that the entire Apache Wave community should be > > excited about participating, and I assume that everyone on the list is > > seeing this and should want to join in. If we have to reschedule, no > > biggie, we're at square zero and it's more about getting people on board > > and brainstorming. If you've been invited already, then invite others who > > you think should be excited. To that end, here's the link to the event: > > > > https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JohnBlossom/posts/KTB6EkxB99q > > > > If you're an Apache Wave committer and you miss the event, then you'll be > > able to view it via YouTube via a link that I'll post here. > > > > I do want to start accelerating communications more in the community, but > > this is a busy week. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > John Blossom > > President > > Shore Communications Inc. > > > > where content, technology and people meet. (Salesmark of Shore > > Communications Inc.) > > > > web: shore.com > > blog: contentblogger.com > > email: jblos...@shore.com > > phone: 203.293.8511 > > fax: 203.663.8259 > > twitter: jblossom <https://twitter.com/jblossom> > > google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom > > LinkedIn: John Blossom <http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnblossom> > > facebook: John Blossom > > skype: jblossom > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Michael MacFadden < > > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I don't want to delay this thing, but are there really no other people > who > >> are interested in this? I think we should really try to reach out > >> personally to some other folks to see if we can attract them in. > >> > >> ~Michael > >> > >> On 7/23/13 7:00 AM, "John Blossom" <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> 1200 ET, btw - bad math. > >>> > >>> All the best, > >>> > >>> John Blossom > >>> > >>> email: jblos...@gmail.com > >>> phone: 203.293.8511 > >>> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:53 AM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> OK, the consensus time/date for the hangout seems to be Wednesday, 31 > >>>> July, 1600 UTC (1000 EDT). I will create and event later today in > >>>> Hangouts. > >>>> If you're on the wave-dev list and have a Google login, please forward > >>>> me > >>>> your email ID/Google+ ID privately and I will add you to the circle of > >>>> invitees. I Have Joseph's ID already and I believe Ali and Michael > also, > >>>> but if you have a doubt, just send it along. If you don't make the > >>>> hangout > >>>> itself, I will be sure to share the link here for the common record. > >>>> > >>>> All the best, > >>>> > >>>> John Blossom > >>>> > >>>> email: jblos...@gmail.com > >>>> phone: 203.293.8511 > >>>> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 9:06 AM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Ali, > >>>>> > >>>>> New tool for me, but worth a try. Here's the Doodle link: > >>>>> http://doodle.com/5z7usamgh7kee4gf > >>>>> > >>>>> I am open to other times, but these seem to be the most logical. > Please > >>>>> remember that UTC at this time of year is one hour less ahead from > the > >>>>> U.S. > >>>>> time zones due to Daylight Savings Time - e.g., ET is UTC+4 right > now. > >>>>> > >>>>> All the best, > >>>>> > >>>>> John Blossom > >>>>> > >>>>> email: jblos...@gmail.com > >>>>> phone: 203.293.8511 > >>>>> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I agree that another hangout sounds fun. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> John, how about setting up a Doodle for us to mark some dates on? > >>>>>> (http://doodle.com/) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ali > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 17 July 2013 15:33, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> Great, Michael, find a date that works for you that seems to match > >>>>>> with > >>>>>>> others' interests and I will be glad to arrange for this. We can > >>>>>> have > >>>>>> the > >>>>>>> link available but not make public, if that helps to encourage > >>>>>> constructive > >>>>>>> participation. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> All the best, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> John Blossom > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> email: jblos...@gmail.com > >>>>>>> phone: 203.293.8511 > >>>>>>> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Michael MacFadden < > >>>>>>> michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I am definitely interested. I will check my schedule for next > >>>>>> week. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ~Michael > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 7/16/13 11:02 AM, "John Blossom" <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> That was my thought, also. ApacheWavers, please respond with some > >>>>>> avails > >>>>>>>>> calibrated to UT+1 for this week and next week. Time to get this > >>>>>> party > >>>>>>>>> started! My L,A. project is waiting for the funder to come > >>>>>> through, > >>>>>> but my > >>>>>>>>> Nkommo project is gaining steam - hopeful that we'll have some > >>>>>> exciting > >>>>>>>>> announcements fairly soon. Time to change the world with Wave!!! > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> All the best, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> John Blossom > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> email: jblos...@gmail.com > >>>>>>>>> phone: 203.293.8511 > >>>>>>>>> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Joseph Gentle < > jose...@gmail.com > >>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I've had a busy few weeks - gearing up to launch our product at > >>>>>> work. > >>>>>>>>>> We should organize another hangout sometime. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> -J > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 7:24 AM, John Blossom - Shore > >>>>>> Communications > >>>>>>>>>> Inc. <jblos...@shore.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Soo...how is this initiative going? How may I help to move it > >>>>>> forward? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> John Blossom > >>>>>>>>>>> President > >>>>>>>>>>> Shore Communications Inc. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> where content, technology and people meet. (Salesmark of Shore > >>>>>>>>>>> Communications Inc.) > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> web: shore.com > >>>>>>>>>>> blog: contentblogger.com > >>>>>>>>>>> email: jblos...@shore.com > >>>>>>>>>>> phone: 203.293.8511 > >>>>>>>>>>> fax: 203.663.8259 > >>>>>>>>>>> twitter: jblossom <https://twitter.com/jblossom> > >>>>>>>>>>> google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn: John Blossom > >>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnblossom> > >>>>>>>>>>> facebook: John Blossom > >>>>>>>>>>> skype: jblossom > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:43 AM, John Blossom > >>>>>> <jblos...@gmail.com > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Ingenious, Torben, certainly adds efficiency. John > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Torben Weis < > >>>>>> torben.w...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/6/25 Joseph Gentle <jose...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When peers connect, they send each other missing ops. > >>>>>> Figuring > >>>>>>>>>> out > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which ops are missing can be surprisingly tricky - but > >>>>>> we'll > >>>>>>>>>> figure > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that out later. New ops must be ingested in order, so > >>>>>> we > >>>>>> always > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ingest > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an operation after ingesting all of its parents. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just use a Merkle Tree that is at the same time a prefix > >>>>>> tree with > >>>>>>>>>>>>> respect > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to the hashes of the ops (explanation below). > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The bandwidth usage is O(1) if both clients are in sync and > >>>>>> O(log > >>>>>>>>>> n) if > >>>>>>>>>>>>> they have one or few different ops and O(n) in the worst > >>>>>> case, > >>>>>>>>>> where n > >>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the number of ops. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Constructing the tree is simple. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Let the hash function output 20 bytes and let's encode this > >>>>>> in > >>>>>> hex. > >>>>>>>>>> This > >>>>>>>>>>>>> results in a hash-string of 40 hex-characters for each > >>>>>> operation. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Each node hashes over the hashes of its children. Leaf-nodes > >>>>>>>>>> correspond to > >>>>>>>>>>>>> operations and thus use the hash value of their respective > >>>>>>>>>> operation. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The tree-invariant is that all siblings on level x share the > >>>>>> same > >>>>>>>>>> prefix > >>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>> x hex-characters. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The tree is not sent over the network. Instead, clients > >>>>>> start > >>>>>>>>>> comparing > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> hashes at the root. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Two clients compare their root hash. If it is equal, the > >>>>>> entire > >>>>>>>>>> tree is > >>>>>>>>>>>>> equal and therefore they are in sync. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> If not, they download all direct children and repeat the > >>>>>> procedure > >>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>> each > >>>>>>>>>>>>> sub-tree rooted by one of these children. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, if child number 3 has a different hash, but all > >>>>>> others > >>>>>>>>>> share > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the same hash, then we have learned that there are one or > >>>>>> more > >>>>>> ops > >>>>>>>>>> with a > >>>>>>>>>>>>> hash of 3xxxx... that are different and need syncing. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Typically we can limit the depth of the tree to few levels. > >>>>>> 8 > >>>>>> levels > >>>>>>>>>>>>> already yield a tree that could store 16^8 possible ops. So > >>>>>> in > >>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>> worst > >>>>>>>>>>>>> case two clients need to wait for 8 round-trips to > >>>>>> determine a > >>>>>>>>>> missing > >>>>>>>>>> op. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition, each client sends a time stamp. So when > >>>>>> syncing we > >>>>>>>>>> report > >>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> last time stamp received from this client and ask for all > >>>>>> ops > >>>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>> client > >>>>>>>>>>>>> received later. If these are few, then simply get them (even > >>>>>> if we > >>>>>>>>>> know > >>>>>>>>>>>>> some of the ops already, because we got them from another > >>>>>> client). > >>>>>>>>>> If > >>>>>>>>>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>>>>>> are too many ops, fall back to the merkle tree. With a good > >>>>>>>>>> approximation > >>>>>>>>>>>>> of RTT and bandwidth, it is easy to calculate which > >>>>>> algorithm > >>>>>> is the > >>>>>>>>>> best > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to sync two clients. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Greetings > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Torben > >> > >> > >> >
