couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From kowsik <>
Subject Re: Chance of including CouchDB in Linux distros or desktops?
Date Fri, 06 Mar 2009 04:17:14 GMT
Speaking of couchlite, I would __love__ to see parallel map/reduce. I
got this 100K+ doc database and the instant-gratification-factor for
trying out new views just sucks (takes about 15 minutes). I have to
reduce the doc count, just so I can try out new ideas in terms of
views. And it's on a dual quad-core system. The other 7 cpus badly
want to relax on the couch, but can't. :-(

If we can get the map/reduce parallelized, I think it would be a huge
win for "personal" couch use. For really simple (but large) data sets,
sqlite is just super __fast__! And it's just a 'gem install sqlite3'


On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Noah Slater <> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:44:58PM +0700, Jason Smith wrote:
>> Alan Bell wrote:
>>> Noah Slater wrote:
>>>>  What actual problem would this solve?
>>> well I think that is the discussion point. It certainly raises a few
>>> interesting thoughts. One of the suggestions was a couchdb process per
>>> user. Not quite sure about this one, sounds like it might not scale
>>> well with multiple users. One database per user might well be handy. It
>>> could perhaps replace the gconf database.
>> Well, gconf has its own API and should probably be "up" even in bad
>> situations like a full disk or when the OOM killer starts spraying
>> bullets into the process space.
> Oh man, that's such a great mental image.
> Guess it helps when you've had to firefight OOM killer on production machines.
>> (To play Devil's advocate, my argument could be made for MySQL too and
>> we don't see that happening.  Some might say that it's just a bad idea,
>> but I would still argue that Linux desktop developers are simply
>> uncreative.)
> I'm sure someone will disagree with me here, but I think that the problem stems
> from the server/client model. While this architectural constraint is great for
> distributed hypertext systems, which is what we're designing CouchDB for, it's
> not so great when you're trying to re-purpose it for local use. That's the
> difference between MySQL and SQLite.
> If someone could adapt CouchDB into CouchLite or something similar...
> --
> Noah Slater,

View raw message