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 david.vancouvering@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.44.30 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=VtPvz8MUIUm+sIHFddhDHIZ52m5LgtD5h1GcNKteUzsVBhSEh/7QrSsEd0dreW1gd1
         2QusHbp/e6LAKSzjdwyW16lJdcIZ+lLjOzBXsCFcvMGE6JM5fa1d9rq8brNj1SB5wgJI
         +eLj6w3yY7AVFgeJ9CO9tShDJ9L8cmkLJAIwo=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20090324140841.GA11684@uk.tiscali.com>
References: <e282921e0903240127q4124efbcjd3cd8dca1a45fef5@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20090324140841.GA11684@uk.tiscali.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:03:55 -0700
Message-ID: <56a83cd00903240903i6c81d23dtefebf570e974fa48@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Where to add documentation for bulk updates
From: David Van Couvering <david.vancouvering@gmail.com>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Cc: Chris Anderson <jchris@apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000325575702ae49ff0465df8797

--000325575702ae49ff0465df8797
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thanks for fixing this, Brian.  I'm not sure I'm totally happy with these
semantics.  Unless I am missing something (more than possible as I'm still
learning CouchDB), for a bulk update with N documents, you would have to do
1 round-trip for the update and N round-trips to check for conflicts (or, if
not using all-or-nothing, N round-trips to check and see if the update was
successful or not).

Isn't there any way for the response to a bulk update to tell you which
documents have conflicts or failures?

If what I'm saying above is correct, I would probably just do regular PUTs
and skip bulk update functionality altogether.

David

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 7:08 AM, Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 08:27:09AM +0000, Chris Anderson wrote:
> > Don't be afraid to edit it!
>
> I just didn't want to stomp on it while someone else was working, and
> create
> more edit conflicts :-)
>
> I have fixed it now, except that I still don't know whether the
> all_or_nothing commit boundary is preserved during replication.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brian.
>


-- 
David W. Van Couvering

I am looking for a senior position working on server-side Java systems.
 Feel free to contact me if you know of any opportunities.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidvc
http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/dcouvering

--000325575702ae49ff0465df8797--