IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 03 December 2015 14:38 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
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 81E2B1A891F for <storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 06:38:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 frD3-3zYhC6n for <storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 06:38:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fugue.com (mail-2.fugue.com [IPv6:2a01:7e01::f03c:91ff:fee4:ad68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B9C41A8907 for <storagesync@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 06:38:08 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="----sinikael-?=_1-14491534856070.5080998982302845"
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
To: storagesync@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAO_YpraF1UrV49Po9PZx6ZoSbcLm5gRPEKXAdTT3VvPPPWEAfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.108.1449000023.26068.storagesync@ietf.org> <1449004445.2745758.455126129.5028FD2B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAO_YprZhCmUxEf=aGCYL=+CLbjUoD1ifpDFsrS7N40Npo4wr+w@mail.gmail.com> <1449050174.3667910.455617161.12EEE3C5@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1449051540970-b577e6c2-393e54ef-bbe05be4@gmail.com> <1449052128.3674794.455635937.667C3E1F@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAPpPfeAdrCZcsYZo7=W6N14K4F2LutXN8BFTetikzKZSr8+vVA@mail.gmail.com> <259424f4.2bca.1516717ef55.Coremail.fsong@bjtu.edu.cn> <56600F0A.9000200@tuxed.net> <CAPpPfeDPHGR+vn0=ji9frF2kr+J=YR76g0e7yOndKzz97bxdHQ@mail.gmail.com> <566014EA.2010705@tuxed.net> <CAO_Yprbc9LMc3TmpkKpmN9hUzAix13nfuSRS5Z8jPf6xu8xjNg@mail.gmail.com> <56601F18.8030409@tuxed.net> <CAO_YpraF1UrV49Po9PZx6ZoSbcLm5gRPEKXAdTT3VvPPPWEAfg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 14:38:05 +0000
Message-Id: <1449153485919-e58fed74-d7eab50a-01b3670c@fugue.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/storagesync/_0ewvOzpuBLYyRg0oAQo-FsB0Vo>
Subject: Re: [Storagesync] Storagesync Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1
X-BeenThere: storagesync@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
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: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 14:38:10 -0000

Thursday, Dec 3, 2015 6:00 AM Linhui Sun wrote:
> However I'd prefer HTTP rather than WebDAV. Since I still think WebDAV is
> not suitable for today's sync service. The frequency of operations is far
> higher than what WebDAV expects. For example, frequently sending propfind
> to detect changes is not a good way in my view.

WebDAV is HTTP.   However, your point about propfind is correct--that doesn't scale.   What you want is a separate layer for dealing with synchronization of metadata.   You could use HTTP transport to do this, but not propfind.


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

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email