couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Stockton <>
Subject In regards to naming of design documents
Date Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:06:14 GMT

We are deciding our convention for how we will emulate tables in couch
db. Our current idea is the user named tables will each have a design
document with punycode names. "table┼łame" is a design doc stored as ->
I.E. _design/tableame-uqb. Of course this brings up a collision
problem for our system defined design docs, such as lucene etc. So it
was decided system design docs would begin with _ and user tables
would be prohibited from beginning with _. However this gives a uneasy
feeling as _ is very much reserved as a first character in both
properties and database names, although as of .10 _design/_foo is
allowed, I would like to make sure this is considered acceptable
practice and will remain available moving forward.

Some thoughts have been a design document specifying the tables within
the database, like _design/tables, this seems like a fairly clean
approach and I am unsure any advantage is given by having separate
design docs for each table as they contain no views (currently those
live in a separate design doc) just meta data about the table. I would
appreciate hearing any solutions people have made to this problem
(user created tables in a database).


View raw message