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 kxepal@gmail.com designates
 74.125.82.54 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJNb-9q_=9vvXmS8DCNJAe8jHcjmr-gzO7Wa5n62vZ9givcw9A@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAPNuaCgSweYwc25awH_nnjiFrEdpxsCfUP3LQzYmehh+6SSJdg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJNb-9r7khESBFyU0pfj1p_+xiKDrjdvb5zfYbNdvAz9T_VztA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHdjipJ4nmTQ7fN4agoz_b7Rdw86Ggu7zjS_y9xNtT90-nWo9Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJNb-9q_=9vvXmS8DCNJAe8jHcjmr-gzO7Wa5n62vZ9givcw9A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:46:26 +0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAHdjipL3RnKZcn62qhS1bjWPd1YqvOJL7kv8W=HPq=Q6B6e4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: proposed feature - list function /update handler half baby
From: Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com>
To: "user@couchdb.apache.org" <user@couchdb.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> mmm..this would require to be database admin and might not been
>> optimal. May be have just update function name there? Also, I believe,
>> such call will ignore any custom response from update function, right?
>> --
>> ,,,^..^,,,
>>
>>
> The purpose would be to only handle the updates of a docs coming in a blik
> update. The return message won't change,
>
> For the admin rights, I don't see, all the rights working for a bulk update
> will be applied there.

Due to custom source code execution like in case of temp views. While
it's might be ok for sandboxed languages, I don't like to have such
feature for Python query server or even Erlang one for oblivious
reasons(:

> Note that such function could introduce the possibility to have
> transactions. Imagine you could also access to the database api in such
> function...

Hm..to have real transaction feature you need to operate with all
posted documents e.g. this would be not update function, but something
different with signature (docs, req) // note docs instead of doc

For access to the database api inside design functions I'm not
sure...I'm playing within for lua query server - it's cool and
very-very powerful feature, but it works just because I could pass
native Erlang couch_* functions into it. For other languages I fear we
have to setup some generic RPC service on CouchDB side for that (and
make a lot of work for public API) and not sure that this is wise
idea.

--
,,,^..^,,,