Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 889C3DB32 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:47:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 19689 invoked by uid 500); 26 Sep 2012 06:47:23 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 19515 invoked by uid 500); 26 Sep 2012 06:47:22 -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 19483 invoked by uid 99); 26 Sep 2012 06:47:21 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:47:21 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=FSL_RCVD_USER,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bchesneau@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.52 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.83.52] (HELO mail-ee0-f52.google.com) (74.125.83.52) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:47:15 +0000 Received: by eekb57 with SMTP id b57so76950eek.11 for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:46:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=QvRY28Rx8gOp6GBH6fJ/iJSBEpygSM1Cyal3PBzYxG8=; b=kJtL8x75FCtJSUAPeF2gOUvfm1io4nner430C5kh1VuEP6psRlA84cp99hX5P4QUYJ zhZSAtjZ+MP2iUzM+3+ehIMLZZp6XcKkiuY/ihHN0WSNOWUkIWOi4AoTt4Z8piwsH23M xJFdCw9vIO59SsWaRqCc8v4YNdDC8zh1u9fYUcPdCnDCTi3TMblNhcQkccduHq5/jB3/ 01Ujfi0oKP7Kg/2rrwTRDRrhck5QrqK3xdfrfo+Y6RGHnuh6dHtdNkiHlp67zm71pGPV bB8QGCy8tvoHcQt530R7cwxLaF+qJmC+v9OaFqXCKMmKLI4MAaFcSEZ49ABHQd1OiKd6 Nm9w== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.201.73 with SMTP id a49mr23153332eeo.39.1348642014881; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:46:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.175.196 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:46:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.175.196 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:46:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <6D6F51F2-9DE5-4CBB-9FB0-9511A863B972@apache.org> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:46:54 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: following fast doc updates From: Benoit Chesneau To: user@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b343fd839e5a604ca953017 --047d7b343fd839e5a604ca953017 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sep 25, 2012 8:32 PM, "Mark Hahn" wrote: > > > The _changes feed only ever shows leaf revisions > > AARRGGHH. I am so screwed. I have been working on a scheme that relies on > tracking every change. To do what? And as everyone knows there is normally no way to > find out what changed in a doc. I am going to have to add a history of > changes to each doc which it not only wasteful, but a pain to implement. Why not storing a change as a new doc? > > Thanks for taking the trouble to give me bad news. > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Adam Kocoloski wrote: > > > On Sep 24, 2012, at 5:16 PM, Mark Hahn wrote: > > > > > If I update a particular doc multiple times rapidly, is each update > > > guaranteed to show up in a continuous changes feed? I am worried that > > the > > > change feed will be optimized to just show the latest value of a doc with > > > multiple updates. This would break my logic. > > > > Your worries are justified. The _changes feed only ever shows leaf > > revisions (i.e., latest updates to branches of the edit tree). Regards, > > > > Adam --047d7b343fd839e5a604ca953017--