[BLOG] The CouchDB Weekly News, November 12th, is out!

Hi everybody! Here we go with the CouchDB Weekly News: http://blog.couchdb.org/2015/11/12/couchdb-weekly-news-november-12-2015/ Discussions – AvanceDB News: ZADevChat Podcast featuring Garren Smith talk about CouchDB

Re: CouchDB 1.7.0 Roadmap

Hi awesome CouchDB folks, my friend Peter and I would very much enjoy evaluating the mentioned auth topics, JWT is especially intriguing to us. > May be we can also include else experimental features, like JWT and/or > Delegated auth. Personally, I would like to see them, but it's all up > to

Serverfault question: "What could make upload speeds vastly differ in CouchDB vs Apache?"

Hey, this is an interesting question. Maybe someone can answer it? http://serverfault.com/questions/735415/what-could-make-upload-speeds-vastly-differ-in-couchdb-vs-apache I am very interested in the reasons ;-) I think it has sth. to do how CouchDB handles the attachment storage. And the test

Re: Serverfault question: "What could make upload speeds vastly differ in CouchDB vs Apache?"

awesome - thanks for your participation :D On 12 November 2015 at 13:04, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > I added a few more questions to the post. > > > On 12 Nov 2015, at 12:59, Alexander Shorin wrote: > > > > Why oranges are more tasty than lemons? > > > > Apache

Re: Serverfault question: "What could make upload speeds vastly differ in CouchDB vs Apache?"

Why oranges are more tasty than lemons? Apache HTTPD is just a web server with no backend storage, logic, etc. CouchDB is a database with HTTP interface (read web server + backend). -- ,,,^..^,,, On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Andy Wenk wrote: > Hey, > > this is an

Re: Serverfault question: "What could make upload speeds vastly differ in CouchDB vs Apache?"

I added a few more questions to the post. > On 12 Nov 2015, at 12:59, Alexander Shorin wrote: > > Why oranges are more tasty than lemons? > > Apache HTTPD is just a web server with no backend storage, logic, etc. > CouchDB is a database with HTTP interface (read web server +

Re: CouchDB 1.7.0 Roadmap

Giovanni, you said earlier in a conversation about proxy > On 21. okt. 2015, at 17.23, Giovanni Lenzi > wrote: > I think CouchDB already has a forward proxy feature for #1 use case > (http://docs.couchdb.org/en/1.6.1/config/proxying.html >

Re: CouchDB 1.7.0 Roadmap

Ooppss, sent to public ML. Sorry for the partial off-topic. You can reply privately if you want. Thanks --Giovanni 2015-11-12 16:54 GMT+01:00 Giovanni Lenzi : > Hi Alexander, > > I'm writing you privately because I don't want the main thread to go > off-topic > > Thanks

Re: CouchDB 1.7.0 Roadmap

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Giovanni Lenzi wrote: > I'm writing you privately because I don't want the main thread to go > off-topic Well, no (: > Thanks for your roadmap to 1.7.0.. seems very very juicy! > > About the "COUCHDB-2752: Validate Host header" in your

CouchDB 1.7.0 Roadmap

Dear CouchDB team, While we're all working on 2.0 is in progress, I fear that we'll end this year without a single release. Technically, there is only one month left till 2016 excluding holidays, but let's be honest - that's not enough for 2.0. So I propose the plan for 1.7 release to not end

Re: CouchDB 1.7.0 Roadmap

Hi Alexander, I'm writing you privately because I don't want the main thread to go off-topic Thanks for your roadmap to 1.7.0.. seems very very juicy! About the "COUCHDB-2752: Validate Host header" in your list. As documented here (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2752), to me it

Re: CouchDB 1.7.0 Roadmap

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Tomas Novysedlak wrote: > > Just a quick one. How about long promised > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1415 ? I'll take a look, but no promises. I'm also not quite sure which exact changes fixed this for 2.0 and will

Re: CouchDB 1.7.0 Roadmap

Hi Alexander, Just a quick one. How about long promised https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1415 ? Thank you, Tomas On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Alexander Shorin wrote: > Dear CouchDB team, > > While we're all working on 2.0 is in progress, I fear that