You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Imagine a user who can read from server but whose writes to server always fail. Normally we will eagerly resolve conflicts by pushing local writes before requesting latest values. But in this case the user can not push the local changes. We could:
Discard latest server value and continue to persist local changes until server write succeeds
Overwrite local changes with latest server value
Discussion (see #store-core)
@matt-ramotar - I think 1 makes the most sense. My preference is to defer to server. On first glance for me deferring to server meant overwriting with latest server value. However I think that is incorrect. I think deferring to server really means not discarding local changes until server receives them and makes a decision.
@digitalbuddha - Some folks might want destructive reads even when local writes exist.
Decision
Defer to server by default but enable configuration when:
Online + No Changes
Online + Changes
Offline + No Changes
Offline + Changes
Can't Update + No Changes
Can't Update + Changes
Can't Read + No Changes
Can't Read + Changes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Problem
Android docs have guidance on conflict resolution once network is available. But they don’t consider cases of certain network services remaining unavailable. See https://developer.android.com/topic/architecture/data-layer/offline-first
Example
Imagine a user who can read from server but whose writes to server always fail. Normally we will eagerly resolve conflicts by pushing local writes before requesting latest values. But in this case the user can not push the local changes. We could:
Discussion (see #store-core)
@matt-ramotar - I think 1 makes the most sense. My preference is to defer to server. On first glance for me deferring to server meant overwriting with latest server value. However I think that is incorrect. I think deferring to server really means not discarding local changes until server receives them and makes a decision.
@digitalbuddha - Some folks might want destructive reads even when local writes exist.
Decision
Defer to server by default but enable configuration when:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: