If "missing" means "they were all quietly moved to a folder you didn't look
in", it's possible. Without client logs we're in the realm of pure
speculation.
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Axel Kittenberger <axk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Would this scenario (there were only 2 clients in sync which each other
> over the syncserver) lead to a situation where the bookmarks in subfolders
> were eventually missing in both?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Richard Newman <rnew...@mozilla.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I know that Firefox keeps many bookmark backups and will restore them in
>>> some cases (eg, on a corrupt places.db) - so it seems possible that
>>> something unrelated to Sync went wrong initially and Firefox made an
>>> attempt to recover bookmarks, which caused Sync to delete the server copy
>>> of all bookmarks and re-upload the restored set. If that restored set was
>>> incomplete, the other devices then also got that incomplete set and
>>> everyone was sad - it seems possible the server copy of the bookmarks could
>>> be better than the restored set making the Sync behaviour simply wrong
>>> here, but it's difficult to speculate about what is actually happening.
>>
>>
>> For the record, note that a DELETE will remove records from the server,
>> but not delete bookmarks from other devices — to do that they'd need to be
>> real records containing {deleted: true}. What might have happened here:
>>
>> * The client wiped the server.
>> * The client uploaded a subset of the user's bookmarks, including folders.
>> * Other clients downloaded those records and made their local databases
>> match.
>>
>> I would be surprised if this somehow deleted local unmentioned records.
>> Sync might have moved the old children to Unfiled Bookmarks.
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Sync-dev mailing list
Sync-dev@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/sync-dev
