[Standards] MAM IDs

Spencer MacDonald spencer.macdonald.other at gmail.com
Mon Feb 17 11:01:47 UTC 2014

I just used XEP-0202 to get around the wrong time issue.

I have only been to dealing with storing messages that people type and send, so the chance of multiple messages in (very) quick succession wasn’t an issue for me. 



On 17 Feb 2014, at 10:55, Thijs Alkemade <thijs at xnyhps.nl> wrote:

> On 17 feb. 2014, at 11:26, Kevin Smith <kevin at kismith.co.uk> wrote:
>> In MAM, stanzas stored get stamped with a MAM ID by the entity that
>> stored them, and entities receiving them then receive this.
>> So a general question - are these useful? Are clients going to ignore
>> them and just request all history since they last requested it anyway?
>> /K
> Because querying by date range is unreliable, and should be avoided wherever
> possible. The client's and the server's clock could be minutes apart and even
> if they were synchronized then multiple messages arriving in the same second
> can lead to difficult edge cases.
> I'd much rather query by the UUID injected into a message than by the
> approximate datestamp.
> Thijs

More information about the Standards mailing list