- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:49:14 -0500
- To: public-ldp <public-ldp@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <5301163A.5060702@w3.org>
Sorry I didn't propose this months ago. It's taken me some time to see
this solution clearly. Thanks to Eric and Andrei for being sounding
boards. They haven't seen this particular framing, though.
This is my proposal for "stable paging", a way to prevent the "lossy
paging" problem in the currect spec and highlighted in RFC-5005. I
believe it can be implemented efficiently, and isn't prohibitively
complicated. I'd like to see it in the LC draft, marked "at risk" in
case it turns out to be harder to implement than I think.
*static paging*
First, let me define something simpler, which I'll call "static
paging". With static paging, the server embeds the etag of the paged
resource into the paging URLs. When it responds to the paging URLs, it
checks to make sure the etag is still the same. If it's not, then the
server responds with a 410 GONE. Now the client knows it needs to
re-initiate paging.
With static paging, the client gets a perfect view of the resource, with
no loss, no corruption. And it's trivial to implement. The problem is
that resources that are large enough to require paging are likely to
change frequently, so a client would be unable to follow PREV/NEXT links
very many hops before the resource changed and the client had to start
again. It might be it could never get more than 10 pages in before it
had to start again. That doesn't seem acceptable.
*stable paging definition*
With "stable paging" I propose a looser requirement. We allow the graph
to change during paging, but each triple which could theoretically ever
be in the graph is assigned to a particular page. This results in
certain guarantees for the client. Specifically, if the client
traverses all the pages with stable paging, (1) every triple it sees
must have been in the graph at some point during the traversal, and (2)
every triple it does not see must have been absent from the graph at
some point during the traversal. In other words, the error is limited
to exactly those triples that changed during the traversal. (With lossy
paging, the client may miss triples that were always in the graph.)
*directory example *
Let's consider the common case: we're paging an LDPC which has a sort
order. (In fact, I expect this will be the only case where paging will
be implemented by most LDP servers. When else would it ever actually be
useful?) Maybe it's a directory of employees, sorted by the foaf:name
of each person. The FIRST page has the folks at the beginning of the
alphabet; the LAST page has the folks at the end.
It's a big directory, and people are being added and removed all the time.
With lossy paging, and a server that naively just puts 100 people per
page, if a name were deleted during forward paging or added during
reverse paging, the client would simply, silently miss a person.
Displayed to a user this might be okay, but if the client is the payroll
system, or an acl system, or a spam filter lookup, or an emergency alert
system, missing even a single person is inexcusable. Static paging might
be nice, but isn't practical. But stable paging is pretty good. With
stable paging we might still miss a person, but only if that person were
added or deleted during paging. That seems like perfectly reasonable
behavior, about what people would expect.
So, how does stable paging work?
Instead of just putting 100 names per page, with stable paging the
server creates a function mapping names to pages independent of what
else is in the graph. It might be the first page has names starting
with A, the second has names starting with B, etc. Or it might be the
first is "" through "Anderson", the second is "Anderson" through
"Aubrey", etc. The paging function can be created by looking at the
database, but once a page has been served to a client and certain
triples included/excluded from it because of some boundary test, that
boundary MUST NOT change.
Each paging URL then includes an identifier for that paging function. As
with static paging, the server can, at any time, give up on a particular
paging function and answer 410 GONE for those URLs. With the directory,
I imagine one would only do that when the directory changes size
significantly. I can also imagine one would have two paging functions,
one for big pages and one for small pages, and the server would pick one
based on a client PREFER header.
*microblogging example*
In the application Andrei and I are working on (microblogging), the
server will have a container of postings on each "channel". It will
keep this sorted by the date of posting, so the LAST page will be the
most recent postings. It's fine if some system posts every 10 seconds
(3 million posts per year) because the clients just jump to the LAST
page, and maybe follow a few PREV links, depending how far back they
want to go. Lossy paging would result in postings not being shown to
some people in some circumstance, which is likely to be unacceptable.
For us, the paging function will just be constructed by partitioning the
range of dates present, and re-partitioning if a lot of postings are
inserted into the middle or deleted. In the normal case of postings
being added "now", we're just adding to the end, so no re-partitioning
is needed.
*conclusion*
I know this is a little complicated, but without it, it seems to me
paging is worthless, or even harmful, at least for the applications I'm
thinking of. I'm willing to help draft text for the spec if people
think this is reasonable to include.
-- Sandro
Received on Sunday, 16 February 2014 19:49:22 UTC