On Jun 13, 2008, at 01:40, Brad Schick wrote:
Thanks for the feedback.
On 06/12/2008 03:21 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
Follow up questions on this: Does CouchDB internally track and
reference
individual fields? Or is the json for each document basically a
blob to
everything except View code?
Documents are stored into native Erlang types representing each
document. Except for the view server, no-one cares about what
a document look like.
So the DB just treats each document like a string I assume? I was
hoping
it actually understood the fields. If it doesn't know about fields,
then
I understand that it might not be that much more efficient doing
things
on the server.
But I'm curious; if the Erlang code doesn't look inside documents
why do
I get errors if I pass just a json array as the body of a document? It
seems to require a json object with named pairs.
No no, CouchDB definitely looks at the JSON structure.
My data-model is still a work in progress, so perhaps I won't really
need to update lots documents in sequence. Mostly I've been thinking
of
maintenance examples. Like, every value for some textfield needs to be
escaped and written back to the DB after there are already a million
documents containing that textfield in the DB.
Yeah, that's a sort of valid use-case and CouchDB is not a very good
fit for that. But if it is maintenance, it might be okay to be slower :)
It would be interesting to know the load on the DB of doing something
like that inside the server versus sending and receiving all million
documents to the client.
You'd save all HTTP handling. So things would be faster. We are at a
point with CouchDB where we are working on getting it right and not
getting it fast or adding features for all edge cases. I'm not saying
that
CouchDB will never get a feature that helps you, but it is not yet a
priority.
Cheers
Jan
--
