couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paul Joseph Davis (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (COUCHDB-837) Adding stale=partial
Date Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:44:16 GMT


Paul Joseph Davis commented on COUCHDB-837:

@filipe - Awesome
@janl - I'd agree with Simon that stale=once is too clever and could be misleading.
@Chris - okgo makes me laugh
@Simon - So far I think this is the best proposal. There are two intentions, and unless a
sufficiently acceptable value for stale can be found that indicates both, then I'd say two
parameters is probably best
@Chrisagain - While I agree that stale=ok was never intended to serve as a way to delay index
updates, I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few people are using it to schedule index updates
for off-peak traffic times. We could argue that the default should be to reindex with a new
stale=noreindex option or some such though.
@jira - I wish you didn't suck so much.

> Adding stale=partial
> --------------------
>                 Key: COUCHDB-837
>                 URL:
>             Project: CouchDB
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>         Environment: all released and unreleased versions
>            Reporter: Filipe Manana
>            Assignee: Filipe Manana
>         Attachments: stale_partial.patch
> Inspired by Matthias' latest post, at,
section "Views are updated on read access", I added a new value to the "stale" option named
"partial" (possibly we need to find a better name).
> It behaves exactly like "stale=ok" but after replying to the client, it triggers a view
update in the background.
> Patch attached.
> If no one disagrees this isn't a good feature, or suggest a better parameter value name,
I'll commit.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message