incubator-couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joan Touzet <jo...@lrtw.org>
Subject Re: Proposal for new feature: Auto Update Functions
Date Sat, 31 May 2014 19:06:54 GMT
The typical solution to this is to use a reverse proxy or API layer to ensure that all client
updates go through the required document update handler. It's unclear to me that this functionality
native in CouchDB is necessary.

If you decide to move ahead with implementation , keep in mind that the 1843-feature-bigcouch
branch as that will be landing very soon. Any proposed patch should be compatible the fabric/chttpd-based
approach and support single- and multi-node (BigCouch cluster) approaches.

-Joan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Franck Eyraud" <franck+couchdbml@nospam.yrnm.net>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Cc: user@couchdb.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2014 8:34:57 AM
Subject: Re: Proposal for new feature: Auto Update Functions

Le 30/05/2014 13:04, Dirkjan Ochtman a écrit :
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Suraj Kumar <suraj.kumar@inmobi.com> wrote:
>> What are your thoughts, both from the use-case as well as
>> internals/performance of CouchDB about this?
> How is this different from document update handlers?
Update handlers must be called by the client to be used. Auto update 
functions would be called even if the client directly POST/PUT a doc to 
the DB (so they would be mandatory).

At first sight a good idea, it seems to me that auto update functions 
would cause problem during replication : the replicated doc might be 
different from the original one.

Franck

Mime
View raw message