[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-837?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12892792#action_12892792
]
Paul Joseph Davis commented on COUCHDB-837:
-------------------------------------------
@Jason - Good point on idempotent GET's
@Filipe - I don't really like it. There's nothing about "stale=relaxed" that in
any way indicates what its for. A good test might be to ask #couchdb "what does
stale=ok do, and if stale=relaxed existed, what would you guess it does".
Unless someone's been paying attention to this ticket I'd doubt that they're
going to come up with "its stale=ok but starts a re-indexing pass". Then again,
I agree with @jchris, I don't have any better ideas so its up to you.
> 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.
