On 16 Aug 2010, at 19:55, Miles Fidelman wrote: > True, but... HTTP is not necessarily an ideal protocol for many-to-many > replication, nor is HTTP 30 years old. There's a lot of experience that > dates back further - for example, UUCP is probably a much better protocol for > large-scale eventual consistency than the pair-wise approach currently used > by CouchDB.
The web is the largest technological system mankind has ever built. It's not perfect, but it works. Not only does it work, but it comes with the largest selection of middleware components imaginable. It is both ubiquitous and commodity, in almost every respect. From network and firewall support, through libraries, to clients. Being able to talk to CouchDB from your web browser is easily (for me) the best thing about CouchDB, and far outweighs any drawbacks, such as protocol overhead. On 16 Aug 2010, at 20:02, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > But we have a rock solid implementation (*cough*) that works today :) — Also > "better" is hardly objective :) — Noah was using exaggeration as a device to > point out that HTTP is indeed very awesome for many reasons including > tooling, firewall "support" (hehe) and many more. Actually, I just made up a number that sounded good. HTTP is really old, yo.
