[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1367?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13175368#comment-13175368
]
Robert Newson commented on COUCHDB-1367:
----------------------------------------
The motivation for c-l's current approach is for indexes to be fresh at all
times as well as updating the lucene indexes optimally (in modest sized
batches). If it were purely driven by user queries, it would be variably stale,
and variably well optimized, like couchdb's indexes. I wanted better for my
child.
> When settings revs_limit on db - the db increases its update_seq counter when
> viewing stats - but not when getting changes
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-1367
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1367
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: HTTP Interface
> Affects Versions: 1.1.1
> Environment: Any
> Reporter: Henrik Hofmeister
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: revs_limit
>
> If you put a number to _revs_limit on a db (to update it) - the
> http://host/dbname/ info document gets an increase in update_seq number -
> however the changes feed does not contain this change (while its not a
> change). This causes the update_seq in the dbinfo doc and the last seq in the
> changes feed to differ - which breaks any application depending on the
> update_seq number as the expected sequence size of the db (in my case -
> couchdb-lucene that will only respond to stale requests because it thinks its
> not up to date)
> I know this is an edge case - but still its something fairly fundamental -
> that clearly is not working as intended.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
