[Standards] XEP-0313: pending 0.7 update review
michal.piotrowski at erlang-solutions.com
Mon May 11 08:22:10 UTC 2020
Thanks for making the changes. I'm really in favour of them. I see there
was no update to the PRs nor here on the mailing list. What needs to happen
in order to proceed with these?
Alos, I have a comment (or rather question) regarding the new way of
querying the archive based on message UIDs. I assume that by UID, you mean
the origin-id as set by the client sending the message. If so, it didn't
find it clearly stated in your proposed changes nor in the current
version of MAM XEP. If not origin-id is meant here, I'd like to know what
UID means in this context.
Software Architect at https://www.erlang-solutions.com/
email: michal.piotrowski at erlang-solutions.com
skype: twitter/github/medium: michalwski
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 at 13:17, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu> wrote:
> On 4/22/20 12:07 PM, Matthew Wild wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 15:50, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu
> > <mailto:flo at geekplace.eu>> wrote:
> > On 4/21/20 2:32 PM, Dave Cridland wrote:> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at
> > > You're going to hate me, but one more thing...
> > >
> > > Current MAM says that servers SHOULD include a count. The problem
> > > this is that it's extremely slow on any system with more than
> > > retention periods, since this tends to degenerate into either a
> > COUNT(*)
> > > SQL query (table-scan-tastic) or a standalone counter (which then
> > drifts
> > > and is a contention point).
> > >
> > > The majority of client libraries appear to ignore the count values
> > > anyway, as far as I can tell, so can we relax this to a MAY?
> > > is MAY-but-only-if, which is arguably really a SHOULD anyway).
> > I think such a relaxation would require a namespace bump.
> > I'm not convinced. In any case, servers that already comply with the
> > SHOULD will probably continue to do so, new servers may be more likely
> > not to, but given that clients don't really use the (unreliable) info
> > today then I don't think we lose anything in practice.
> I could follow that argumentation in this case. It's probably just me,
> but I am very conservative when it comes to relaxations of keywords.
> - Florian
> Standards mailing list
> Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
> Unsubscribe: Standards-unsubscribe at xmpp.org
Code Sync & Erlang Solutions Conferences
Lite ITA - Bologna: Rescheduled
Code BEAM STO - Stockholm: Rescheduled
ElixirConf EU - Warsaw: 7-8 October 2020
Code Mesh - London: 5-6 November
Erlang Solutions cares about your data and privacy; please find
all details about the basis for communicating with you and the way we
<https://www.erlang-solutions.com/privacy-policy.html>. You can update your
email preferences or opt-out from receiving Marketing emails here
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards