couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Scholl>
Subject Re: couch_gen_btree: pluggable storage / tree engines
Date Sun, 01 Feb 2009 12:52:29 GMT
Martin Scholl wrote:
> Chris Anderson wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Paul Davis <> wrote:
>>> Martin,
>>> Very cool ideas. We've been discussing erlang plugins. The
>>> conversation has generally gotten as far as, "erlang plugins... yeah
>>> we should have those."
>> I agree this is cool, but I think it would be healthier for the
>> project to wait until we release a rock-solid 1.0.
>> There are some incredibly non-obvious things happening inside, and a
>> big disruption right now wouldn't necessarily keep them all in
>> balance. Once we've met 1.0, we'll have a solid basis for comparison,
>> of any alternate implementations.
>> Then, let the fun begin. :)
>> Martin, I'd very much like to hear more about the sorts of indexers
>> you'd build. Sounds exciting.
> I'd like to experiment with Merkle trees, because these could turn out
> to be a good foundation for several use-cases:
> - index/tree-synchronization: replication is trivial with merkle trees,
> only changed parts of the tree get replicated in a secure manner.
> - secure document storage: modified documents (disc corruption, sw
> failure or even the "bad cracker"-case)
The important information is missing here:  `-> "external modifications
to documents get detected". Why can this be important? To use CouchDB
for compliance or archiving tasks.


View raw message