IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Storagesync] Fw: Re: Storagesync Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1

"Fei Song" <fsong@bjtu.edu.cn> Mon, 07 December 2015 01:33 UTC

Return-Path: <fsong@bjtu.edu.cn>
X-Original-To: storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A0581A90F6 for <storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 17:33:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.789
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.789 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_BASE64_BLANKS=0.001, RCVD_IN_PSBL=2.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bmv_MUAsnjg0 for <storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 17:33:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bjtu.edu.cn (mail.bjtu.edu.cn [218.249.29.198]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 399141A90F4 for <storagesync@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 17:33:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from PC-201001061KKK (unknown [211.71.74.217]) by Jdweb2 (Coremail) with SMTP id M55wygCX6AGA4mRWkQAAAA--.4S2; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 09:36:01 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 09:33:13 +0800
From: Fei Song <fsong@bjtu.edu.cn>
To: storagesync <storagesync@ietf.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.0.1.91[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2015120709331295395077@bjtu.edu.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-CM-TRANSID: M55wygCX6AGA4mRWkQAAAA--.4S2
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvdXoWrZw18Gw1rWFyruF1UKF1Utrb_yoWDZFc_Wr 1kA348Cw1kGrZIq3WfJFs3WrsrJay5GFy8Ka4UtFZFv3y8urn5AF4kWr97ua4agFy8Jrnr GFZ3Kry5Gr43GjkaLaAFLSUrUUUUUb8apTn2vfkv8UJUUUU8Yxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT 9fnUUIcSsGvfJTRUUUb4xYjsxI4VWxJwAYFVCjjxCrM7AC8VAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1l1xkIjI8I 6I8E6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Wr0E3s1l1IIY67AEw4v_Jr0_Jr4l8cAvFVAK0II2c7xJM2 8EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWDJVCq3wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVW0oVCq 3wA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26rxl6s0DM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW0oVCq3w AS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487Mc02F40EFcxC0VAKzVAqx4xG6I80ewAv7VC0I7IY x2IY67AKxVWUJVWUGwAv7VC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lOx8S6xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r4UM4 x0Y48IcxkI7VAKI48JM4xvF2IEb7IF0Fy264kE64k0F24lFcxC0VAYjxAxZF0Ex2IqxwCY 02Avz4vE14v_KwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwC20s026c02F40E14v26r1j6r18MI8I3I0E74 80Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jr0_JrylIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0 I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF04 k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rW3Jr0E3s1lIxAIcVC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVC2z280aVCY 1x0267AKxVWUJVW8JwCE64xvF2IEb7IF0Fy7YxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07jO8nOUUU UU=
X-CM-SenderInfo: aytwlqpemw3hxhgxhubq/
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/storagesync/QtK_CWto12LqahLVkxRAWkPqF5M>
Subject: [Storagesync] Fw: Re: Storagesync Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1
X-BeenThere: storagesync@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: fsong <fsong@bjtu.edu.cn>
List-Id: Mechanisms to synchronize client file systems with Internet-based data storage services <storagesync.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/storagesync>, <mailto:storagesync-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/storagesync/>
List-Post: <mailto:storagesync@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:storagesync-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storagesync>, <mailto:storagesync-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 01:33:16 -0000

Yes, Is it one of the reasons why you like distributed mode (comparing with C/S mode)? :)
I agree that the evaluation of Etags should depond on the situation (frequent changes, Sync conflicts, etc.)
And the burdens in both network side and server sides should be consider simultaneously.


Fei Song

From: Ted Lemon
Date: 2015-12-07 02:26
To: storagesync
Subject: Re: [Storagesync] Storagesync Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1

Etags are not really much simpler than a metadata versioning sync protocol, and they are a lot less efficient.   Having to fetch the whole directory for every directory that contains a change is expensive, both for the server and the client, unless changes are infrequent.   And because the server is the sole source of truth, it's a lot more fragile.


--
Sent from Whiteout Mail - https://whiteout.io

My PGP key: https://keys.whiteout.io/mellon@fugue.com


_______________________________________________
Storagesync mailing list
Storagesync@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storagesync

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email