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 B7B3B10F0B for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 03:08:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 74068 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2013 03:08:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 73038 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2013 03:08:48 -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 73028 invoked by uid 99); 15 Aug 2013 03:08:47 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 03:08:47 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_REPLY,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of andrey.kouprianov@gmail.com designates 209.85.128.177 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.128.177] (HELO mail-ve0-f177.google.com) (209.85.128.177) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 03:08:40 +0000 Received: by mail-ve0-f177.google.com with SMTP id cz11so207016veb.8 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 20:08:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=4R1qcXGTFNPQbLeS99h7WTGZCMYtdnXwO40DtckjRM4=; b=UFYYZi1LpJm/2y54k98Beje83wGSbY3n4mwyKDDeuFl15bEG0tz+b9AN7YcAubkTJ3 qn01HTV6NFhdOmnU7GGxkG45jv3mu1V86kgJ4zhLZtKHBcSQEuI19TeAJyK1rAPAiVKu QN0oXe84uMinriWuF3BykIwvA9uzQyjrxNNMhIfJivpm4NAWsI+blZT8vNpIflBHibdE idG04pRND45lwiny3u8qYqz3VJ28hETP5AC1Q1JXbdrXGWdJftnw6sDRUWJmdu6/9Dbr 0DTKJOaKCHU2qW5KvNvQWElvXKMnpB6nsCcR00zkIXPMoHdPQQO17X9N+3DEbdNpN4bi kRqQ== X-Received: by 10.221.51.206 with SMTP id vj14mr12473432vcb.17.1376536099691; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 20:08:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.59.4.42 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 20:07:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Andrey Kuprianov Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 10:07:59 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Erlang vs JavaScript To: user@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113322523e232704e3f3c957 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001a113322523e232704e3f3c957 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 So far it seems very promising. :) However, what they say can happen is that since Erlang code has no sandbox, anything could be done to the system through design views, if your database is compromised. On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Stanley Iriele wrote: > 5-6 times eh?...that would give me an honest reason for picking up Erlang > again....I'm going to try converting all of my views to Erlang and see what > happens..what's the worst that can happen? :-) > On Aug 14, 2013 7:55 PM, "Andrey Kuprianov" > wrote: > > > I had a 5-6 times speed boost yesterday, after converting one of my > design > > docs to Erlang. Like a breath of fresh air, if you ask me. > > > > Andrey > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Stanley Iriele > >wrote: > > > > > I'm curious... What exactly is the performance gain from writing > > > views/shows/ etc in Erlang vs JavaScript... From what I've seen the > > > JavaScript view server is sufficiently fast and feature complete. > > > > > > So my question is this.... Is the Erlang view server that much > faster?... > > > Is there another gain that I'm missing?..and is it as feature complete > as > > > the JavaScript equivalent? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Stanley > > > > > > --001a113322523e232704e3f3c957--