couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Liam Staskawicz <>
Subject Re: partial/diff updates?
Date Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:05:57 GMT
On Nov 26, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Dan wrote:

> Here is a conversation I had on the IRC channel #couchdb on this  
> subject on
> november 24, 2008 (2 days ago). Hope this helps!
> (04:01:26 PM) dsimard: I just  wanted to know if an attachment  
> changes, will
> the new revision contain just the "diff" with the old attachment or  
> the
> complete attachment?
> (04:01:49 PM) jan____: complete attachment. diffs are the devil
> (04:03:08 PM) dsimard: damn... all fields of a document are stored  
> as a full
> document?
> (04:03:18 PM) dsimard: I really thought that diffs were used
> (04:03:35 PM) jan____: no, no diffs. diffs are the devil
> (04:04:14 PM) dsimard: ok, could you elaborate on the evilness of  
> diffs?
> (04:04:44 PM) dsimard: I just want to know more about it
> (04:05:04 PM) jan____: dsimard: you need to keep diffs around  
> forever to
> construct the latest live doc. this totally conflicts with the couchdb
> storage model which uses full representations of each revision.
> (04:05:04 PM) dsimard: or if you have a good link about it
> (04:05:35 PM) jan____:
> (04:05:36 PM) jan____: that one
> In my opinion, it would be a great addition to couchdb. But still, I  
> can't
> wait to use it on my next project.

Hm - maybe it's a different consideration for attachments, but I don't  
see why you would need to keep a diff around in the context of  
updating a document.  Apply the updates from the PUT to the latest  
revision and then call it the new revision.  Crazy?


View raw message