Re: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview
+1 Sent from my iPhone > On 31 Jul 2018, at 13:52, Eiri wrote: > > Hi all, > > Since we seems to be in agreement and with 2.1.2 released, I'm starting to > work on this. > Just wanted to let everyone know. > > > Regards, > Eric > > > >> On Apr 3, 2018, at 13:03, Paul Davis wrote: >> >> +1 >> >>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:23 AM, Joan Touzet wrote: >>> >>> +1. >>> >>> 1. No one has worked on a fix since its contribution prior to 2.0. >>> 2. The code will always be in git in an older revision if someone is >>> looking for it. >>> 3. We have #592 which describes the fundamental problem that needs to be >>> resolved. (By the way, with my PMC hat on, you should unassign this issue >>> from yourself unless you're actively working on it *right now*.) >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Eiri" >>> To: dev@couchdb.apache.org >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 8:15:21 AM >>> Subject: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> It is my understanding that a current implementation of view changes in >>> mrview is conceptually broken. I heard from Robert Newson that he and >>> Benjamin Bastian found that some time ago doing testing with deletion and >>> recreation of docs emitting same keys in the views. >>> >>> I propose to remove view changes code from mrview and its mention from >>> documentation, as it seem that people keep trying to use those for filtered >>> replication or getting a false impression that it's a simple fix in fabric. >>> Not to mention that the current implementation quite complicates mrviews >>> code and takes space in view files with building unneeded seq and kseq >>> btrees. >>> >>> We can re-implement this feature later in more robust way as there are >>> clearly a demand for it. Please share your opinion. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Eric >>> >
Re: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview
Hi all, Since we seems to be in agreement and with 2.1.2 released, I'm starting to work on this. Just wanted to let everyone know. Regards, Eric > On Apr 3, 2018, at 13:03, Paul Davis wrote: > > +1 > > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:23 AM, Joan Touzet wrote: > >> +1. >> >> 1. No one has worked on a fix since its contribution prior to 2.0. >> 2. The code will always be in git in an older revision if someone is >> looking for it. >> 3. We have #592 which describes the fundamental problem that needs to be >> resolved. (By the way, with my PMC hat on, you should unassign this issue >> from yourself unless you're actively working on it *right now*.) >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Eiri" >> To: dev@couchdb.apache.org >> Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 8:15:21 AM >> Subject: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview >> >> Hi all, >> >> It is my understanding that a current implementation of view changes in >> mrview is conceptually broken. I heard from Robert Newson that he and >> Benjamin Bastian found that some time ago doing testing with deletion and >> recreation of docs emitting same keys in the views. >> >> I propose to remove view changes code from mrview and its mention from >> documentation, as it seem that people keep trying to use those for filtered >> replication or getting a false impression that it's a simple fix in fabric. >> Not to mention that the current implementation quite complicates mrviews >> code and takes space in view files with building unneeded seq and kseq >> btrees. >> >> We can re-implement this feature later in more robust way as there are >> clearly a demand for it. Please share your opinion. >> >> >> Regards, >> Eric >>
Re: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview
+1 On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:23 AM, Joan Touzet wrote: > +1. > > 1. No one has worked on a fix since its contribution prior to 2.0. > 2. The code will always be in git in an older revision if someone is > looking for it. > 3. We have #592 which describes the fundamental problem that needs to be > resolved. (By the way, with my PMC hat on, you should unassign this issue > from yourself unless you're actively working on it *right now*.) > > - Original Message - > From: "Eiri" > To: dev@couchdb.apache.org > Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 8:15:21 AM > Subject: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview > > Hi all, > > It is my understanding that a current implementation of view changes in > mrview is conceptually broken. I heard from Robert Newson that he and > Benjamin Bastian found that some time ago doing testing with deletion and > recreation of docs emitting same keys in the views. > > I propose to remove view changes code from mrview and its mention from > documentation, as it seem that people keep trying to use those for filtered > replication or getting a false impression that it's a simple fix in fabric. > Not to mention that the current implementation quite complicates mrviews > code and takes space in view files with building unneeded seq and kseq > btrees. > > We can re-implement this feature later in more robust way as there are > clearly a demand for it. Please share your opinion. > > > Regards, > Eric >
Re: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview
+1. 1. No one has worked on a fix since its contribution prior to 2.0. 2. The code will always be in git in an older revision if someone is looking for it. 3. We have #592 which describes the fundamental problem that needs to be resolved. (By the way, with my PMC hat on, you should unassign this issue from yourself unless you're actively working on it *right now*.) - Original Message - From: "Eiri" To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 8:15:21 AM Subject: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview Hi all, It is my understanding that a current implementation of view changes in mrview is conceptually broken. I heard from Robert Newson that he and Benjamin Bastian found that some time ago doing testing with deletion and recreation of docs emitting same keys in the views. I propose to remove view changes code from mrview and its mention from documentation, as it seem that people keep trying to use those for filtered replication or getting a false impression that it's a simple fix in fabric. Not to mention that the current implementation quite complicates mrviews code and takes space in view files with building unneeded seq and kseq btrees. We can re-implement this feature later in more robust way as there are clearly a demand for it. Please share your opinion. Regards, Eric
Re: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview
+1 Best Regards, Peng Hui From: Jan Lehnardt To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Date: 03/04/2018 08:27 PM Subject:Re: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview +1 > On 3. Apr 2018, at 14:15, Eiri wrote: > > Hi all, > > It is my understanding that a current implementation of view changes in mrview is conceptually broken. I heard from Robert Newson that he and Benjamin Bastian found that some time ago doing testing with deletion and recreation of docs emitting same keys in the views. > > I propose to remove view changes code from mrview and its mention from documentation, as it seem that people keep trying to use those for filtered replication or getting a false impression that it's a simple fix in fabric. Not to mention that the current implementation quite complicates mrviews code and takes space in view files with building unneeded seq and kseq btrees. > > We can re-implement this feature later in more robust way as there are clearly a demand for it. Please share your opinion. > > > Regards, > Eric -- Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__neighbourhood.ie_couchdb-2Dsupport_&d=DwIFAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=PKZ65oA9tV05sXjYYyZUJf_d-ASaaLXiLw-gQdWPDsQ&m=nPOwj5hgKwt--QE2hhAmieQNTNvvFfp38KvSZcamqsg&s=WG4yFgf53YADEIbestiNBmx9Xor8EeOliPCypnjRKFw&e=
Re: Proposal: removing view changes code from mrview
+1 > On 3. Apr 2018, at 14:15, Eiri wrote: > > Hi all, > > It is my understanding that a current implementation of view changes in > mrview is conceptually broken. I heard from Robert Newson that he and > Benjamin Bastian found that some time ago doing testing with deletion and > recreation of docs emitting same keys in the views. > > I propose to remove view changes code from mrview and its mention from > documentation, as it seem that people keep trying to use those for filtered > replication or getting a false impression that it's a simple fix in fabric. > Not to mention that the current implementation quite complicates mrviews code > and takes space in view files with building unneeded seq and kseq btrees. > > We can re-implement this feature later in more robust way as there are > clearly a demand for it. Please share your opinion. > > > Regards, > Eric -- Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
