Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

Hi, There is a fundamental incompatibility between CouchDB using couch_file/btree and CouchDB using FDB. The choice at hand here is between two different forms of compatibility break; 1) All responses that were over a single snapshot in CouchDB 1/2/3 will still be over a single snapshot in

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

If this proposal means v3.x replicators can't replicate one-shot / normal / non-continuous changes from 4.x+ endpoints, that sounds like a big break in compatibility. I'm -0.5, tending towards -1, but mostly because I'm having trouble understanding if it's even possible - unless a proposal is

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

-1? I've read over the thread and looked at the foundationdb docs, but I'm not sure I understand something about the proposal. Given a client that makes a `_all_docs?include_docs=true` or similar query on a particular db and that db reaches enough data to always take longer to work with than the

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

> I withdraw my vote until I can get a clearer view. Nick would you mind re-stating? Not at all! The longer version and other considerations was stated in my last reply to the discussion thread so I assumed that was accepted as a consensus since nobody replied arguing otherwise.

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

The vote is on the proposal text in the quote. > On 9 Jan 2021, at 04:37, Nick V wrote: > > +1 for 1 through 3 > > -1 for 4 as I think the exception should apply to normal change feeds as > well, as described in the thread > > Cheers, > -Nick > >> On Jan 8, 2021, at 17:12, Joan Touzet

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

Wait, what? I thought you agreed with this approach in that thread. I withdraw my vote until I can get a clearer view. Nick would you mind re-stating? -Joan On 2021-01-08 11:37 p.m., Nick V wrote: +1 for 1 through 3 -1 for 4 as I think the exception should apply to normal change feeds as

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

+1 for 1 through 3 -1 for 4 as I think the exception should apply to normal change feeds as well, as described in the thread Cheers, -Nick > On Jan 8, 2021, at 17:12, Joan Touzet wrote: > > Thanks, then it's a solid +1 from me. > > -Joan > >> On 2021-01-08 4:13 p.m., Robert Newson wrote:

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

Thanks, then it's a solid +1 from me. -Joan On 2021-01-08 4:13 p.m., Robert Newson wrote: You are probably thinking of a possible “group commit”. That is anticipated and not contradicted by this proposal. This proposal is explicitly about not using multiple states of the database for a

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

You are probably thinking of a possible “group commit”. That is anticipated and not contradicted by this proposal. This proposal is explicitly about not using multiple states of the database for a single doc lookup, view query, etc. > On 8 Jan 2021, at 19:53, Joan Touzet wrote: > > +1. > >

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

+1 -Russell On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:54 AM Joan Touzet wrote: > +1. > > This is for now I presume, as I thought that there was feeling about > relaxing this restriction somewhat for the 5.0 timeframe? Memory's dim. > > -Joan > > On 07/01/2021 06:00, Robert Newson wrote: > > Hi, > > > >

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

+1. This is for now I presume, as I thought that there was feeling about relaxing this restriction somewhat for the 5.0 timeframe? Memory's dim. -Joan On 07/01/2021 06:00, Robert Newson wrote: > Hi, > > Following on from the discussion at >

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

+1 On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 5:03 AM Robert Newson wrote: > > +1 > > > On 7 Jan 2021, at 11:00, Robert Newson wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Following on from the discussion at > >

Re: [VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

+1 > On 7 Jan 2021, at 11:00, Robert Newson wrote: > > Hi, > > Following on from the discussion at > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rac6c90c4ae03dc055c7e8be6eca1c1e173cf2f98d2afe6d018e62d29%40%3Cdev.couchdb.apache.org%3E > >

[VOTE] couchdb 4.0 transaction semantics

Hi, Following on from the discussion at https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rac6c90c4ae03dc055c7e8be6eca1c1e173cf2f98d2afe6d018e62d29%40%3Cdev.couchdb.apache.org%3E