[jira] Resolved: (COUCHDB-295) Upload attachment form in futon does not work

2009-03-19 Thread Christopher Lenz (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-295?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Christopher Lenz resolved COUCHDB-295. -- Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 0.9 This should've been fixed by r756186. > U

[jira] Assigned: (COUCHDB-295) Upload attachment form in futon does not work

2009-03-19 Thread Christopher Lenz (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-295?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Christopher Lenz reassigned COUCHDB-295: Assignee: Christopher Lenz > Upload attachment form in futon does not work > -

[jira] Commented: (COUCHDB-275) couch crashes erlang vm under heavy load

2009-03-19 Thread Joshua Bronson (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-275?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12683519#action_12683519 ] Joshua Bronson commented on COUCHDB-275: Though the patch prevented the term_to_bi

_bulk_docs parsing and error handling

2009-03-19 Thread Brian Candler
I see that the response from _bulk_docs has been changed so that it's a simple JSON array, rather than an object: [ {"id":"doc1","rev":"1-1708578174"}, {"id":"doc2","error":"conflict","reason":"Document update conflict."} ] So I was checking to see whether the request format had changed t

Re: stale views and scalability

2009-03-19 Thread Curtis Caravone
Thanks. I built the latest from the trunk and it works beautifully! On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 4:54 AM, Adam Kocoloski wrote: > On Mar 19, 2009, at 7:39 AM, Curtis Caravone wrote: > >> The documentation for stale=ok describes the following semantics: >> >> The stale option can be used for higher pe

Re: Failing tests

2009-03-19 Thread Robert Dionne
I've been also seeing fails in stats.js recently on Safari 4, though with the latest from last night the issue is now in: Assertion 'should increment database changes counter for document moves' failed: expected '482', got '481' prior to that the failure related to max_open_databases. I po

Re: Bulk updates and eventual consistency

2009-03-19 Thread David Van Couvering
OK, thanks, that is clear. It's sort of guaranteeing a "binary compatibility" between single node and multi-node solutions, where you don't paint yourself into a corner when just working in a single node. David On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Antony Blakey wrote: > > On 19/03/2009, at 4:20 PM

Failing tests

2009-03-19 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
Hello there, (Paul Davis mentioned that I should ping the list on this) I just upgraded to a new nightly build (r755866), but some of the tests fail. Paul tells me that the problems with stats are known, but the both of us also see problems with rev_stemming. This is the error message I get: "#

Re: stale views and scalability

2009-03-19 Thread Adam Kocoloski
On Mar 19, 2009, at 7:39 AM, Curtis Caravone wrote: The documentation for stale=ok describes the following semantics: The stale option can be used for higher performance ... Using this option essentially tells CouchDB that if a reference to the view index is available in memory, go ahead and u

stale views and scalability

2009-03-19 Thread Curtis Caravone
The documentation for stale=ok describes the following semantics: The stale option can be used for higher performance ... Using this option essentially tells CouchDB that if a reference to the view index is available in memory, go ahead and use it, even if it may be out of date. ...if there is no

[jira] Updated: (COUCHDB-194) [startkey, endkey[: provide a right-open range selection method

2009-03-19 Thread Chris Anderson (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-194?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Chris Anderson updated COUCHDB-194: --- Affects Version/s: (was: 0.9) 0.10 r755926 adds an inclusive_end

Re: Bulk updates and eventual consistency

2009-03-19 Thread Antony Blakey
On 19/03/2009, at 4:20 PM, David Van Couvering wrote: My apologies if this was already answered in that very long thread, but perhaps someone can summarize for me... It is intended that the difference between single-node and multi-node cluster operation not be exposed to clients, to ensur