couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randall Leeds <randall.le...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: feasibility of a design doc option to use the "ddoc new"/"ddoc <id>" based protocol for map and reduce as well
Date Tue, 28 Feb 2012 02:42:28 GMT
Which part of the document are you missing? I know attachments are not sent
because that's a lot of overhead for people who attach static resources to
the design doc. Anything else?
On Feb 27, 2012 4:12 PM, "Ronny Pfannschmidt" <Ronny.Pfannschmidt@gmx.de>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> while trying to build a a view server for ddocs that validate/support
> documents as FSM (Finite State Machine)
> i hit a inherent limit of the protocol,
>
> map and reduce don't get the full ddoc, but only a part of it,
> which means my view server can't actually work with the full ddoc
> unless i do some weird hacks, and end up in a situation,
> where i circumvent proper view invalidation
>
> if map/reduce where allowed to opt in for using the newer protocol for
> accessing functions,
> my problem would go away
>
> as for view invalidation, a simple variant could just use the _rev,
> a more sophisticated one would take a hash of parts of the document
> (using excludes/includes defined in options as well)
>
> Regards,
> Ronny
>

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