couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From J Chris Anderson <>
Subject Re: Ars Technica finds DesktopCouch too laggy
Date Sat, 15 May 2010 17:24:23 GMT

On May 15, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Manuel de la Peña wrote:

> On 15 May 2010 14:23, Sven Helmberger <> wrote:
>> Manuel de la Peña wrote:
>>> The whole process does not make bloody sense since
>>> they already have the data in memory, why would they push it in the db and
>>> read it afterwards???
>> For knowing how the new data is sorted into the views without having a
>> second, duplicated instance that figures that out?
>> Regards,
>> Sven
> The data is sorted by date and he already knows that, no need to do it It
> also means that he is ignoring the fact that the index of the view has to be
> recalculated when you do the first request of it.  One option fo gwibber to
> work correctly, you will simply just add the new messages to the current
> view queue while in another thread you add the messages to the db and touch
> the views to ensure that they are recalculated. But ofcourse, you do not
> need to store the messages, the messages should be retrieved using the REST
> APIs and not using CouchDB as a an over eng cache
> Kr,
> Mandel

If it is true that they are doing individual operations instead of batches (doc save/view
query loops) then that is the source of their problem. If each query result from facebook
/ twitter / etc is just saved to CouchDB (in bulk_docs) they will probably get enough better
performance that other optimizations won't be necessary.

I hope Gwibber / desktopcouch authors get the message. (I haven't noticed slowness but I'm
running an Ubuntu VM on SSD)


View raw message