couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randall Leeds <>
Subject Re: CouchDB Cluster/Partition GSoC
Date Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:46:24 GMT
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 01:41, Randall Leeds <> wrote:

> Thanks for the suggestions, Chris.
> Link is still here:
> I can't seem to access the edit page for the official proposal submission
> right now. I get an error.
> However, I've done some updates. At this point, I'm hoping that you or
> Damien might consider picking this up and decide to endorse it and become a
> mentor. Then it's up to the foundation and Google!

I suppose if you do decide to, a link to the proposal should probably go
Proposal URL:

It's a shame I can't seem to edit the proposal right now, so maybe a link to
the document version since it's more up-to-date?

> Either way, I want to be involved in this work :)
> Cheers,
> Randall
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 16:30, Chris Anderson <> wrote:
>> From the proposal:
>> > 2. Fast http proxy writen in Erlang which leverages the consistent hash
>> for determining destinations
>> You might find it simpler to use Erlang messaging instead of http in
>> the proxy layer. I'm not certain about this but it might end up
>> simpler and faster in the long run. There are arguments in favor of
>> http, so I'd say the choice is yours, but keep in mind someone will
>> eventually attempt the other way, no matter which you chose.
> Yeah, this is what I had in mind after we talked and I wrote this wrong.
>> > August 10 - Submit patches for review, discussion and polishing
>> I think it would make for a smoother process if you attempt to
>> integrate as you go. It'll mean identifying the smallest useful chunks
>> of work, to get us from here to there, but it's also the open-source
>> way, and I think it results in better code. Nothing like having what
>> you're working on being used in real applications.
>> Can you identify the very first step? - maybe it's an integration test
>> in JavaScript that proves that three dbs (on one host) can have
>> document ids partitioned correctly. (I think a core thing here is
>> getting the right validation functions on the right db's, so they
>> reject bad PUTs)
> I finally got around to a crack at adding some JS test examples.
> I'd like to add some examples about querying partition setup, etc, but then
> again, that might just be in the _design doc. There are so many questions
> unsettled still that I feel like what I added is probably enough to get a
> feel for it.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message