Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.0 \(1990.1\))
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Removing "delayed_commits"
From: Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <5460A43F.8000807@posteo.de>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 15:07:30 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8FCB5B70-DD0F-4BAE-B90C-1F4917D64900@apache.org>
References: <5460A43F.8000807@posteo.de>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org

I=E2=80=99d say let=E2=80=99s keep em for now.

Best
Jan
--

> On 10 Nov 2014, at 12:40 , Klaus Trainer <klaus_trainer@posteo.de> =
wrote:
>=20
> Hello everybody.
>=20
> I'd like to hear your thoughts about removing the `delayed_commits`
> option together with the corresponding code paths.
>=20
> Note that independent of this discussion (and in contrast to 1.x
> releases), the delayed commits feature will be disabled by default in
> the upcoming 2.0 release.  I'd like to propose that we now (as we're
> already breaking API compatibility with the new major release) go the
> full way and remove that feature entirely.
>=20
> Speaking for myself: I've never needed that feature, and I'd certainly
> not miss it.  I remember several times where I was in the awkward
> position of having to explain it.  After recommending people to not
> enable delayed commits in production, I'd usually get asked about the
> purpose of that feature.  Then I would answer something awkward like
> "we've implemented and enabled delayed commits by default so that
> CouchDB looks good in certain benchmarks".
>=20
> Would you miss delayed commits?  Do you think that users would miss =
it,
> and if so, why?
>=20
> Thanks,
> Klaus
>=20