On Monday, July 26, 2010, Paul Joseph Davis (JIRA) <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-837?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12892572#action_12892572 > ] > > Paul Joseph Davis commented on COUCHDB-837: > ------------------------------------------- > > @filipe - Awesome > @janl - I'd agree with Simon that stale=once is too clever and could be > misleading. > @Chris - okgo makes me laugh > @Simon - So far I think this is the best proposal. There are two intentions, > and unless a sufficiently acceptable value for stale can be found that > indicates both, then I'd say two parameters is probably best > @Chrisagain - While I agree that stale=ok was never intended to serve as a > way to delay index updates, I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few people are > using it to schedule index updates for off-peak traffic times. We could argue > that the default should be to reindex with a new stale=noreindex option or > some such though. > @jira - I wish you didn't suck so much. > >> Adding stale=partial >> -------------------- >> >> Key: COUCHDB-837 >> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-837 >> Project: CouchDB >> Issue Type: Improvement >> Environment: all released and unreleased versions >> Reporter: Filipe Manana >> Assignee: Filipe Manana >> Attachments: stale_partial.patch >> >> >> Inspired by Matthias' latest post, at >> http://www.paperplanes.de/2010/7/26/10_annoying_things_about_couchdb.html, >> section "Views are updated on read access", I added a new value to the >> "stale" option named "partial" (possibly we need to find a better name). >> It behaves exactly like "stale=ok" but after replying to the client, it >> triggers a view update in the background. >> Patch attached. >> If no one disagrees this isn't a good feature, or suggest a better parameter >> value name, I'll commit. > > -- > This message is automatically generated by JIRA. > - > You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. > >
I like having the two params best, but calling it reindex might trick folks into thinking it'll rebuild the whole thing. How does stale=ok&update_index=true sound?
