couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antony Blakey <antony.bla...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Erlang vs Scala
Date Thu, 09 Apr 2009 08:30:24 GMT

On 09/04/2009, at 12:28 PM, Wout Mertens wrote:

> Actually that's an interesting thought...
>
> Let the db store whatever you give it. Attachments do not exist. If a
> document is too large to store in the btree, it is stored as a blob
> like attachments now.
>
> That would allow you to e.g. create a view with all jpg files and
> their resolution by plugging in an indexing framework for image/JPEG
> type objects.
>
> Also, couchdb gets to decide what should be a blob and what not. As
> computers grow todays 4kb is tomorrows 4mb. Why should all attachments
> be stored in files if small ones could sit in the db?
>
> Treating attachments the same as all documents gives them the same
> conflict protection etc.
>
> Current large documents would benefit from the streaming code that
> attachments get.
>
> The current hierarchy that can be given by embedding / in attachment
> names would be generalized to all documents.
>
> I like it...

We are on the same page.

Antony Blakey
--------------------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god  
than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other  
possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
   --Stephen F Roberts



Mime
View raw message