Hello, I'm no software developer, but I imagine that if the different clients, or sources of information, shared a common clock, and the cloud server checked that clock, the system itself could resolve the conflicts. just my opinion of course.
Thanks On Oct 28, 2012, at 2:44 AM, Dwight Arthur <m...@grantsmiths.org> wrote: > I've been thinking long and hard about this and I think I've been coming at > it from the wrong angle. I have been studying, when there's a conflict, how > can an algorithm resolve it. The better question, I think, is whether the > conflict can be avoided. The only way to make a conflict is to update a task > on one device and leave that change unsynched for long enough for the user to > get to another device and make a conflicting update. If every platform > synched soon after a local change and also soon after a remote change has > been synched, provided that the sum of the two "soon"s is less than the time > it takes to go to a new device and enter a change, then there will be no > conflict. (Except in abnormal circumstances such as blackout.) > > On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:53:50 AM UTC-4, kitus wrote: > <...> I was wondering, can't the cloudsync handle conflicting data > autonomously? why do I have to be prompted when the same action has been > updated from different devices? <...> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MyLifeOrganized" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mylifeorganized/-/Ust4cQY5HccJ. > To post to this group, send email to mylifeorganized@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > mylifeorganized+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized?hl=en.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
