couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ericdes <>
Subject Re: What happens with a document, if a conflict is not resolved?
Date Sun, 08 Nov 2009 06:43:27 GMT

I read your posts about conflicts with great interest. I'm currently 
writing a .Net driver for CouchDB, and my point of view about making the 
default GET include all conflicts is that it is not a bad idea at all 
(even ideal), although a driver implementation may 'hide' that by 
implementing a GetDocument method that would add the query option by 

I think it's more annoying not to have the possibility of using the 
conflict query 'conflicts=true' when requesting multiple documents (I 
mean especially when you don't want to include the docs). For example, 
this could be used by a CouchDB explorer type application that would 
retrieve all record metadata and signal the conflicts with a specific 
icon (like tortoise SVN does when a document is out of sync for example).

Eric Desgranges.

On 11/1/2009 5:23 PM, Brian Candler wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:40:43AM +0000, Brian Candler wrote:
>>> I think I'd be in favor of making the default GET include all conflicts,
>>> but probably in the _conflicts field so as to minimize the changes to the
>>> current API.
>> As a first step, that would be unlikely to break anyone, would make it clear
>> when a conflict exists, and would simplify the API by removing the need for
>> ?conflicts=true. So I'd vote for that.
> Also: if you query a view with ?include_docs=true, at the moment you never
> get a _conflicts member in the document, even if you say
> ?include_docs=true&conflicts=true
> Perhaps you should?
> B.

View raw message