sorry for the (extremely) slow response. I thought I replied, but it
turns out I never hit "send" :-/
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Jean-Denis <jean...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I really love the project. Kudos on a great idea and congrats on the
> funding (and thanks for the blog).
Thanks a lot :-) It's been a long way, we're really excited about the future.
> I had a question about the current API and the FluidInfo/DB roadmap:
>
> I noticed that there currently is no mention of pub/sub on objects or
> tags for updates. The more I think about FluidDB and its
> implications, the more it occurs to me that apps will want to be
> notified when some of their underlying data is updated (or when some
> tags are added to an object that they have an interest in).
It's a good suggestion, a database for real time data is the natural
next step for FluidDB. There are plans for an XMPP (Jabber) front-end
which would support notifications. However, many other protocols have
surfaced since we wrote that roadmap: webhooks, websockets and
pubsubhubbub.
I'm not sure which one is the best, but we'll probably support
webhooks first, as it seems the easiest to implement, i.e. "give me a
URL where I can POST results as they come".
Our architecture should be able to support async notifications (after
all, it's all powered by message queues, in our case AMQP :-)), and
it's definitely in our roadmap, but we just got funded and need more
people to implement that and many other features we too would like to
see in FluidDB. BTW, we're hiring! http://fluidinfo.com/jobs/
Thanks a lot for your very valuable suggestions, and sorry for the
really late response.