Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 70455 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2009 13:48:29 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Jan 2009 13:48:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 71460 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jan 2009 13:48:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 71414 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jan 2009 13:48:28 -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 71403 invoked by uid 99); 3 Jan 2009 13:48:28 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 03 Jan 2009 05:48:28 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [80.68.94.123] (HELO tumbolia.org) (80.68.94.123) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 03 Jan 2009 13:48:19 +0000 Received: from nslater by tumbolia.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LJ6r8-0005zT-Lu for user@couchdb.apache.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2009 13:47:58 +0000 Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:47:58 +0000 From: Noah Slater To: user@couchdb.apache.org Subject: Re: Does CouchDB check autogenerated document id's? Message-ID: <20090103134758.GC22715@tumbolia.org> Mail-Followup-To: user@couchdb.apache.org References: <21939021.1440421230910477169.JavaMail.servlet@perfora> <46D7ECAF-8D5E-46D4-BFD3-302B3CB1DBEC@jasondavies.com> <4F6E3427-CFDD-472E-BE2F-1E1CB6D04257@jasondavies.com> <214c385b0901021610p1289148dr5cf4e8522574b6f9@mail.gmail.com> <20090103131218.GA22715@tumbolia.org> <20090103134108.GB22715@tumbolia.org> <80C775A8-9B57-4000-BB2E-2165B18F69FC@jasondavies.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <80C775A8-9B57-4000-BB2E-2165B18F69FC@jasondavies.com> X-Noah: Awesome User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 01:45:31PM +0000, Jason Davies wrote: > On 3 Jan 2009, at 13:41, Noah Slater wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 11:58:59PM +1030, Antony Blakey wrote: >>> GET is meant to be idempotent - >>> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html. >> >> So? How does the idempotency of GET affect the UUID service? > > Quoting from the RFC: A sequence that never has side effects is > idempotent, by definition (provided that no concurrent operations are > being executed on the same set of resources). > > Hence the UUID service is idempotent, as it has no side effects. My point exactly, glad we're all in agreement! Heh heh. -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater