Proposal for lazy-loading room members to improve initial sync speed and client RAM usage

[benparsons]

Documentation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11yn-mAkYll10RJpN0mkYEVqraTbU3U4eQx9MNrzqX1U/edit
Author: @ara4n
Date: 05/03/2018
PR: #1287

[ara4n]

Implementation over at matrix-org/synapse#2970

[ara4n]

It's worth noting that lazyloading members is entirely orthogonal to paginating the room list - in an ideal world we could end up supporting both.

[ara4n]

rolling this back to proposal-review as even though there’s been informal thumbs up from @richvdh and @erikjohnston, the whole thing is blocked on #688 before it can progress to completion and the proposal should be formally reviewed in the context of #688

[richvdh]

given that I've been busily merging PRs which implement this, and I gather that client-side support is likewise basically done, it seems like this is basically being treated as ready.

In other words: I'd suggest that anyone with objections makes them quickly, and it would be nice if the doc could be updated to clarify the current state.

[richvdh]

Implementation over at matrix-org/synapse#2970

(and matrix-org/synapse#3589, matrix-org/synapse#3568, matrix-org/synapse#3567 and matrix-org/synapse#3331)

[turt2live]

I vote that this MSC should enter the final comment period with the view of having it be a spec PR next week. Can the Spec Core Team either approve going into FCP or comment with any concerns. Those outside the team with concerns/suggestions are also welcome to raise them.

• @anoadragon453
• @ara4n
• @dbkr
• @erikjohnston
• @KitsuneRal
• @mujx
• @richvdh
• @turt2live
• @uhoreg

(also this has been in review for a while now, but no one updated the labels)

[ara4n]

I've been using this on riot/web + matrix.org and it seems to be working okay. People seem to have religious objections to the way it special cases members (as opposed to paginating rooms or whatever), but it seems like a good enough solution for now.

[uhoreg]

I'm going to abstain on voting due to lack of bandwidth to try to process this, and I trust that it has been sufficiently picked at by other people.

[richvdh]

Again the comments need cleaning up and integrating, but at least this one is clear enough to merit entering FCP

[anoadragon453]

I'm happy with this entering FCP

[Half-Shot]

Should something have happened with regards to FCPs?

[anoadragon453]

@mscbot fcp merge

[mscbot]

Team member @anoadragon453 has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged teams:

• @KitsuneRal
• @anoadragon453
• @ara4n
• @dbkr
• @erikjohnston
• @richvdh
• @turt2live
• @uhoreg

No concerns currently listed.

Once a majority of reviewers approve (and none object), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.

[Half-Shot]

Does @ara4n need to make a PR with the proposal?

[Half-Shot]

@anoadragon453 Given the spec proposal at #1758 got merged, do we close this?

[anoadragon453]

@Half-Shot Yep, and I'll update the tags.

[turt2live]

... it's not merged yet... there's still stuff missing.

[Half-Shot]

(my bad, I failed to read context)

[turt2live]

Spec PR: #2035

[turt2live]

merged 🎉