Re: Syncing and partial (truncated) results

[Robert Sayre <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ezra Cooper wrote:
> > Hmm. I'm curious about the use case here. Is this aiming for sync
> > behavior?
>
>
> Let me start here, because I have a very specific protocol approach in  
> mind, but I think it might cover 90% or more of the likely uses.
...
>    1. Request range: LastSyncDate thru ThisSyncStartDate
>    2. Let "MarkDate" be the date of oldest item in result--is it older  
> than LastSyncDate?
>    3. If so, we're done--we have a full list of all the items that were  
> updated between LastSyncDate
>    4. If not, request range LastSyncDate thru MarkDate.
>    5. Repeat from 2.
...
> The crux of this is that, since we're working backward in time, no  
> surprises can come once we begin the sync. Also, since we're using date  
> ranges, a series of ranges is guaranteed to pick up everything in that  
> range; using ordinal indices, the meaning of a range request would  
> change whenever anything changes in the list, leading to duplicated or  
> missing items.

OK, I think I understand how this works.

It would be really helpful if you could document an example series of 
requests and responses. Check out the "Examples" section of 
PaceServiceError[0] which shows "Interaction of a server with three 
clients ('Client A','Client B', and 'Client C') over time".

Something like that could clear up a lot of misunderstandings.

Robert Sayre

[0] http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceServiceError