On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Adam Kocoloski <kocol...@apache.org> wrote:
>> How do you feel about migrating to a blessed _local/security document?
>> Maybe its latest version could be cached in the header for speed?
>>
>> Pros:
>>
>> * Couch gets (conceptually) simpler rather than more complex
>> * It's versioned, you get full doc semantics
>> * It doesn't replicate, but 3rd-party tools can pseudo-replicate it as needed
>> * Design documents can enforce policies: if(doc._id == _local/security
>> && doc.members.length == 0) throw {forbidden:"This database may never
>> be public"}
>>
>> Eagerly awaiting a list of cons :)
>
> The only trouble I have with _local/security is that _local documents are
> represented using #doc records instead of #full_doc_info records. As such,
> they have no support for MVCC.
I did not realize that, so one of the points I made was wrong. FWIW I
always assumed _local docs were normal docs, except they are
special-cased to neither replicate nor be represented in views.
Thanks for the tip!
--
Iris Couch
