couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stanley Iriele <>
Subject Re: emit(key,doc) vs. emit(key,null) and the wiki
Date Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:53:05 GMT
>From my experience there is a slight performance gain when emitting the doc
as the value... But that is list when the site of the doc is
large...because it seems to take longer to update the views... Also...did
you compact your database/views after you made that change?
On Apr 1, 2013 8:12 AM, "Robert Newson" <> wrote:

> The emitted value is definitely included in the .view file output. Are
> your docs very small?
> On 1 April 2013 16:06, George Walker <> wrote:
> > In the CouchDB wiki (, it says:
> >
> > =========================================
> > In a view, why should I not emit(key,doc) ?
> >
> > The key point here is that by emitting ,doc you are duplicating the
> document which is already present in the database (a .couch file), and
> including it in the results of the view (a .view file, with similar
> structure). This is the same as having a SQL Index that includes the
> original table, instead of using a foreign key.
> >
> > The same effect can be acheived by using emit(key,null) and
> ?include_docs=true with the view request. This approach has the benefit of
> not duplicating the document data in the view index, which reduces the disk
> space consumed by the view. On the other hand, the file access pattern is
> slightly more expensive for CouchDB. It is usually a premature optimization
> to include the document in the view. As always, if you think you may need
> to emit the document it's always best to test.
> > =========================================
> >
> > In my own research, that seems to not be the case. I have a CouchDB 1.2
> instance, and when I have a view that uses emit(key, doc) on my 0.8 GB
> dataset, I see a 1.4 GB .view file. When I create the exact same view, but
> instead emit(key, null) or emit(key, {"_id":doc._id}) it creates a .view
> file that is also 1.4 GB. I should also add that the indexing time to
> create these views is non-trivial on my current machine. Taking around
> 10-15 minutes. Examining the .view files with a text editor seems to
> indicate that they are all storing the full documents in the view index,
> which does not follow what it says in the wiki.
> >
> > It seems like the wiki should be updated? Or a bug? As I see no
> difference between using emit(key, doc) and emit(key, null).
> >
> > Thanks!
> > --
> > George W.
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message