couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Miles Fidelman <mfidel...@meetinghouse.net>
Subject Re: why erlang?
Date Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:16:21 GMT
Paul,

Thanks for the detailed and thoughtful reply.

Paul Davis wrote:
> The biggest thing that an HTTP replicator has going for it is its
> simplicity. The entire protocol can be summed up in as little as "open
> an HTTP connection, stream documents edited after the last
> replication."
Unfortunately, not so simple for someone who wants to deploy lots of nodes.
> Switching the replicator to a more advanced protocol I think isn't
> really in the cards for the problem that the current replication
> scheme is meant to solve. I think that implementing a solution that
> uses P2P/UUCP/multicast discovery would be an awesome feature, but not
> something I would see going into the 'core' CouchDB distribution until
> someone steps up with a long term commitment to supporting it.
>    
I keep looking at doing something like this.  Unfortunately, I lost the 
funding source that I thought was going to pay for my time, sigh...
> Whether the replicator breaks HTTP is rather more of a philosophical
> debate best left for when I've had a few beers. I don't discount your
> points that SOAP/XML-RPC suck hard, but I don't think they have any
> bearing on the replication protocol given how its implemented.
>    
Not so much that it breaks HTTP, as that HTTP imposes some serious 
constraints on the replication approach that other protocols don't

Thanks again,

Miles

-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In<fnord>  practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra



Mime
View raw message