Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ulises.cervino@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.218.19 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references;
        b=kn1MRBhPXi+kxuyh/rm53U2eGKTTs1VpZ/OFzlo4ui1qeb4kkH1PGyYsXQAg8mUOkf
         SmnwKDzwUPdlSi3daUHkbmdrK0dvRdtT+MJ2FlZpEiyPw/442v1ydJJtbBU0zRg1Jec4
         8X5sLvnL2kcX+ZzS0bINMjpln72x7gFERPRNY=
Message-ID: <226d73360901190100s465df056n46b08b9ea0855e93@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:00:51 +0000
From: Ulises <ulises.cervino@gmail.com>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Subject: Re: all_seqs stream (was Re: Update notifications including update
 sequence)
In-Reply-To: <e282921e0901190042w7f652a9chef1ac24eef2c310c@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <e282921e0901182355t12890a06jd7e8bf8f9bcc5e8a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <e282921e0901190019s27d1d7ebyb734e2a9ce8b726e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <226d73360901190021j267cb586tdf7375dbc7a94730@mail.gmail.com>
	 <e282921e0901190030x13133bbha5152ad87b89c964@mail.gmail.com>
	 <226d73360901190035w47021a63p9e54459c0d6b3ea9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <e282921e0901190042w7f652a9chef1ac24eef2c310c@mail.gmail.com>

> The _external would still need to be able to respond to client
> requests - although processes (like an index updater) that don't
> directly talk to the client could work just fine without being
> registered as a db-update-notification-process.

That's what I meant, sorry for not being clear. I was probably
thinking more about things like FTI which do an extra layer of
processing on the documents and not much interaction with users
(unless queried).

> There is also some value to having Couch agree to kick a set of
> scripts when updates come in (in case something dies), but if the
> process management code starts to bog us down we can always drop it
> and refer people to their operating system's services support.

Agree. Still I see a real benefit in being able to run an indexer on a
totally different host than the one couchdb is running on.

> I got excited to write this thread when I started drafting out what
> IRC would look like if it ran on Couches. :)

it would look like teh wins?

U