Joseph, By nobody had heard of OT, I assume you mean nobody at Google. People had been creating toy apps based on OT since the mid 90's. Several of them use a purely P2P model like COT, GOTO, etc.
As far as hashing, how would that help? ~Michael On 6/11/13 6:50 PM, "Joseph Gentle" <jose...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Michael MacFadden ><michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> There are pros and cons to doing OT in a client-server or P2P manner. >> Googles view was that if you have potentially hundreds or thousands of >> collaborators, then in a P2P mode you wind up with state vectors, vector >> clocks, or context vectors that are just to large. Each peer has to >>track >> the state of each other client. Operations typically have a context >> vector attached to them. In this case you have context vectors, and >>state >> tables that grow out of hand. Google chose to avoid this by using a >> client server OT model. > >Nobody had heard of OT when wave was conceived - nobody really had the >expertise to build a scalable system that worked over P2P. It was a >pragmatic decision rather than some clever design choice. > >You're right about vector clocks and so on. How do you feel about >copying git and hashing operations? > >-J
