On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Chris Cotter <
kdsx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I know, operational transform is not like CQRS in a huge way:
> there is no notion of a central server, and thus no central server does any
> "processing" of events/commands sent between clients. OT is by design
> decentralized.
>
> The OpenCoweb framework provides OT for event processing and guarantees apps
> to be synchronized if an application honors all events the OT algorithm
> returns. Since OCW is meant for web applications, and since browsers are not
> allowed to communicate in true peer2peer fashion, OCW comes with a central
> server that ferries messages between clients. As mentioned before, OCW's
> server also attaches a total order integer to all events; this is a
> requirement of the specific OT algorithm used by OCW.
>
> As far as I know, there exist alternative OT algorithms that do not need a
> total order for events. There also exist algorithms with the notion of UNDO.
> I don't know how these algorithms work, but these might be related to event
> sourcing. OpenCoweb does not provide any sort of UNDO built into the API
> itself, although application developers could very well devise their own
> UNDO framework on top of OCW's API.
>
> Does that more or less satisfy your question about CQRS and OT?
It does indeed, thank you. I'm not particularly worried about undo,
based on OT. Good to know that was something they added on top.