From user-return-10374-apmail-couchdb-user-archive=couchdb.apache.org@couchdb.apache.org Sat May 08 15:36:09 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 23846 invoked from network); 8 May 2010 15:36:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 8 May 2010 15:36:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 53466 invoked by uid 500); 8 May 2010 15:36:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 53415 invoked by uid 500); 8 May 2010 15:36:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 53407 invoked by uid 99); 8 May 2010 15:36:07 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 May 2010 15:36:07 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.5 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,FREEMAIL_REPLY,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of silent_vendetta@hotmail.com designates 65.55.90.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [65.55.90.169] (HELO snt0-omc3-s30.snt0.hotmail.com) (65.55.90.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 May 2010 15:36:01 +0000 Received: from SNT123-W8 ([65.55.90.135]) by snt0-omc3-s30.snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 8 May 2010 08:35:40 -0700 Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_5cb3291a-f0d9-46f4-96dc-808221e5a1f5_" X-Originating-IP: [71.227.235.190] From: Chris Hicks To: Subject: RE: Best views performance Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 08:35:40 -0700 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <197FACD6-584C-4316-8AB6-BC904A55AA2D@googlemail.com> References: ,<197FACD6-584C-4316-8AB6-BC904A55AA2D@googlemail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2010 15:35:40.0485 (UTC) FILETIME=[1D3A6F50:01CAEEC4] --_5cb3291a-f0d9-46f4-96dc-808221e5a1f5_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That does help. I am looking for low client side access times and quick upd= ating of the indexes as in many cases there will be many rapid-fire changes= to certain documents and I need the index to be as up to date as possible.= All The other concerns=2C while always important to keep in mind=2C are lo= wer priority for me for this project. I think going the same route as you d= id is best=2C break everything down into really small bits and only grab th= e specific data needed from a smaller index. Thanks for the reply Simon. Chris Hicks > From: simonmetson@googlemail.com > To: user@couchdb.apache.org > Subject: Re: Best views performance > Date: Sat=2C 8 May 2010 07:56:42 -0500 >=20 > Hi=2C > I think it depends on what you are willing to trade. More indexes can =20 > mean using up more disk space=2C and potentially longer calculation =20 > time=2C but more efficient access on the client side (e.g. I'd get the =20 > two fields I wanted instead of 20). So it depends on your application: =20 > do you pay through the nose for storage=2C do you expect a lot of =20 > updates (and hence a lot of view indexing) or are things fairly =20 > static=2C do you have 1 client process of millions.... > I tend to try and have a view that indexes one piece of information =20 > and then reuse that as much as possible with grouping=2C reduce=3Dfalse= =2C =20 > include_docs etc. I'll only add a view when I know that one of my =20 > existing ones can't be bent to my will. Not sure if that's the best =20 > way to go so YMMV... > Cheers > Simon >=20 > On 7 May 2010=2C at 17:03=2C Chris Hicks wrote: >=20 > > > > If I have a DB of lets say 100K+ documents=2C with each document =20 > > having 20 fields=2C would it be more efficient to have a view that has = =20 > > indexed each document and simply run more complex queries over them =20 > > or would it be better to have a number of smaller views=2C each =20 > > covering only a few fields=2C and running much simpler queries on each = =20 > > of these views for whatever data might be needed at that moment. As =20 > > with most things the answer is probably "it depends." If there is no =20 > > easy answer could anyone tell me what the pros and cons are to each =20 > > of these approaches? > > Chris Hicks =09 > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search=2C chat and e-mail from =20 > > your inbox. > > http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=3DPID28326::T:WLMTA= GL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1 >=20 =20 _________________________________________________________________ The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with H= otmail.=20 http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=3Dmulticalendar&ocid=3D= PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5= --_5cb3291a-f0d9-46f4-96dc-808221e5a1f5_--