From dev-return-6060-apmail-couchdb-dev-archive=couchdb.apache.org@couchdb.apache.org Thu Aug 20 21:21:24 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 33208 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2009 21:21:24 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Aug 2009 21:21:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 28811 invoked by uid 500); 20 Aug 2009 21:21:42 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 28737 invoked by uid 500); 20 Aug 2009 21:21:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 28722 invoked by uid 99); 20 Aug 2009 21:21:42 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:21:42 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of b.candler@pobox.com designates 208.72.237.25 as permitted sender) Received: from [208.72.237.25] (HELO sasl.smtp.pobox.com) (208.72.237.25) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:21:30 +0000 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B23F12C4B; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:21:08 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=date:from:to :cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :in-reply-to; s=sasl; bh=7Nf+fbHvvmaxPpNWfibLdw0cY0s=; b=l/d8qeN QDmOv7L10m76dBUqcgoaIpE/EM4+RlENExlex43ur6o0tE9W9f+qQDG95KaNJnsh uVMJAXcShXBUbMDWZklzoq8o1VP3fy6DUSAs0F8EBvZ6gDNdPvp9rwQO+0SjHNNO cW1w2PMtWLzvKQOkGiFva6hrGw/JTfq2+mGo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=date:from:to:cc :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :in-reply-to; q=dns; s=sasl; b=jLpeXM5E4y8Acgdth4WZ7BVgoxfahqNNC ZB4AfvZSlPF0BbhrVU7yvvzIjgXcz0ejWKp1ji8Q1RQWiLHO674vYkMB9l+KuGe4 brQjkVZOPlrCmuGKhZEzgvFtg6qaxmcEtJ+fxJgeYVDsxxrYvszf6JbU1xQfN9jn ggi7poZrWM= Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C07112C4A; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:21:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mappit (unknown [80.45.95.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1FF5212C48; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:21:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from brian by mappit with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MeF4C-0006s7-DJ; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 22:21:04 +0100 Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 22:21:04 +0100 From: Brian Candler To: Chris Anderson Cc: dev@couchdb.apache.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r804427 - in /couchdb/trunk: etc/couchdb/default.ini.tpl.in share/www/script/test/delayed_commits.js src/couchdb/couch_db.erl src/couchdb/couch_httpd_db.erl Message-ID: <20090820212104.GA21441@uk.tiscali.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5FEC8546-8DCF-11DE-818F-CA0F1FFB4A78-28021239!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:52:27PM -0700, Chris Anderson wrote: > > e.g. a PUT request could specify max_wait=2000 (if not specified, use a > > default value from the ini file). Subsequent requests could specify their > > own max_wait params, and a full commit would occur when the earliest of > > these times occurs. max_wait=0 would then replace the x-couch-full-commit: > > header, which seems like a bit of a frig to me anyway. > > I like the approach you've outlined here. I think the default could > eventually be to allow CouchDB to be adaptive for high throughput, but > we'd have to write that code first. > > Once we have all this, batch=ok could still be meaningful, when the > client wants to be able to send a bunch of serial writes to CouchDB > and is fine with the reduced guarantees that 202 Accepted gives. Yes, I agree that batch=ok makes sense if it means "just give me a 202 response straight away", and the data will probably make it to disk some time in the future.