Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of dbfclark@gmail.com designates
 209.85.210.180 as permitted sender)
Subject: Re: 1 large view vs 2 smaller views
References: 
 <CA+ckZiB5B0OF5gyj4c8+T+mrCM=AhVC8KW5893Y7RG6gxgc0nQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACsOAD1dFCy7KYK91OGyVNHxJfEzSFh7ja3wUwucNLcGpz10qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+ckZiDK1ZP8QW1i0F6SaYL700t70L_Y7k+B6d5yxsiMhxH8+Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dennis Clark <dbfclark@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+ckZiDK1ZP8QW1i0F6SaYL700t70L_Y7k+B6d5yxsiMhxH8+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <1B706292-E785-4F53-927E-2B0DC7E8434D@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 18:41:21 -0400
To: "user@couchdb.apache.org" <user@couchdb.apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 8J2)

You won't be able to use just that view to get the sorbability you want, the=
n -- lexicographic ordering means that that your example will sequence your k=
eys by doc.depth first, so you couldn't query and get all docs with the same=
 date or date range.

Perhaps best to step back a second and explain a little more about what you'=
re trying to do? We can probably help, but only with a hair more input.

On Jul 24, 2011, at 6:24 PM, Ganzha Alexey <tretiy3@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for your answer.
>=20
> Actually it is very important to sort by the other fields: dep, price. eve=
n
> _id i need to separate docs with the same price.
> So, the only way i see - this additional "week" (''THIS_IS_FOR_ALL'',
> 'THIS_IS_FOR_LAST_WEEK_
> ONLY') element in the key, at the first place. And i have to match this
> element exactly for all docs, or for week docs.
>=20
>=20
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Dennis Clark <dbfclark@gmail.com> wrote:=

>=20
>> How important is it to you to have the view sorted by doc.dep? If the
>> answer
>> is "not at all," the idiomatically CouchDB way to do this is:
>>=20
>> emit(doc.date,[doc.dep,doc.price,doc._id]);
>>=20
>> and then let users query with startkey/endkey if they need only the docs
>> from the last week. This way you don't need some "in the last week" field=

>> that you have to keep updated.
>>=20
>> On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Ganzha Alexey <tretiy3@gmail.com> wrote:=

>>=20
>>> Hi.
>>> I am trying figuring out whats the better.
>>>=20
>>> Say i have a view:
>>> ...
>>>   emit([doc.dep,doc.price,doc.date,doc._id]);
>>> ...
>>>=20
>>> Some users need all docs. And some of them need only docs for the last
>>> week.
>>> Just add an attribute 'last_week' in required documents.
>>> Then, in the view i will check this attribute and there are 2 cases:
>>>=20
>>> Filter docs in 1 view
>>>=20
>>> emit(['THIS_IS_FOR_ALL',doc.dep,doc.price,doc.date,doc._id]);
>>>=20
>>> if (doc.last_week)
>>>=20
>> emit(['THIS_IS_FOR_LAST_WEEK_ONLY',doc.dep,doc.price,doc.date,doc._id]);
>>>=20
>>> i will be able to query this view with the additional key member (will
>> user
>>> need all docs, or only last week docs)
>>>=20
>>> Or make 2 separate views. First:
>>>=20
>>> emit([doc.dep,doc.price,doc.date,'doc._id]);
>>>=20
>>> and  Second:
>>>=20
>>> if (doc.last_week)
>>>   emit([doc.dep,doc.price,doc.date,doc._id])
>>>=20
>>> First case will emit more keys, and the keys will be larger by 1 element=
.
>>> But in second case, there are 2 views.
>>>=20
>>> What would you prefer. What is the better for performance?
>>> Thanks
>>>=20
>>=20