couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Adam Kocoloski <>
Subject Re: Silent corruption of large numbers
Date Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:08:31 GMT
On Nov 10, 2009, at 3:19 AM, Chris Anderson wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Roger Binns  
> <> wrote:
>> I understand that it is just the way JS works and it is impractical  
>> to fix.
>>  I do think it would be valuable for there to be a test/compliance  
>> suite in
>> CouchDB that at least detects and documents the issue for any view  
>> server.
>> That is also valuable information for anyone choosing a view server.
> This is definitely good to document. We've only recently added
> integration tests of our view servers. Adding a patch to
> test/query_server_spec.rb to check for your number handling case
> wouldn't be hard, and might be a fun place to take up CouchDB hacking.

Big +1 from me.  I'm a bit less laissez-faire (dare I say relaxed?)  
about this issue than Chris and Paul.  I think we absolutely can be  
responsible for the behavior of the JavaScript query server -- we're  
shipping the darn thing with CouchDB! :-)  With that said, I can't say  
for certain what is the best default solution.  Some folks may prefer  
the lossy handling of large numbers to a situation where CouchDB  
rejects those documents or refuses to allow them to be indexed by a  
particular view server.

Cataloging the limitations of different implementations is a great  
place to start.  Best,


View raw message