Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of bchesneau@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.83.52 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAHdjipJHYAxEm=SXR52ncjRGKCFQBvC4VyiDv3a36sFfyTSgHA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAJNb-9q7fzWWpOQEBdCEBnbMahsUJJ3Pm35wwTHRO8fpkYZS+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<C47751B8-E9D0-4471-9CCB-D241EFD6DA86@apache.org>
	<CAHdjipJHYAxEm=SXR52ncjRGKCFQBvC4VyiDv3a36sFfyTSgHA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:12:41 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAJNb-9pWLBO=DiunM0WyAyu9kAPTwi=khdyYqoHoLFj3Z6aCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: include_atttachments=true & include_docs=true
From: Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Robert Newson <rnewson@apache.org> wrote=
:
>> The attachment data would be streamed, not fully materialized into memor=
y, so the difference is the size of an attachment chunk (which is under 8k =
iirc).
>
> That's right for client and direct view request, but I'm asking about
> _list processing on query server side. Streaming attachments to it via
> stdin wouldn't solve that problem if attachments will be embed into
> doc object. If not: I suppose then there would be new command set that
> breaks compatibility and it's not clear how to fast read and process a
> lot of chunks within fixed os_process time.
>
Ah. you're right lists processing would be a problem with the current
implementation.  But imo that is another problem that could be fixed
later. Current implementation of the query servers can be improved a
lot...

- beno=EEt