Hi Adam,
Thanks for the detailed email. In terms of the data model, that makes a lot
of sense.
I’m still playing a bit of catchup on understanding how fdb works, so I
can’t comment on the best way to retrieve a document.
>From my side, I would like to see our decisions also driven by testing
Bob, Garren, Jan - heard you loud and clear, K.I.S.S. I do think it’s a bit
“simplistic" to exclusively choose simplicity over performance and storage
density. We’re (re)building a database here, one that has some users with
pretty demanding performance and scalability requirements. And yes, we
I am OK not doing term sharing. I would like to keep these two performance
efficiencies discussed earlier:
1) A client can retrieve the “winning” revision of the document (and only that
revision) in a single roundtrip knowing only the document ID
2) A client can update an edit branch of a
We cannot do simple thing if we want to support sharing of JSON terms. I think
if we want the simplest path we should move sharing out of the scope. The
problem with sharing is we need to know the location of shared terms when we do
write. This means that we have to read full document on every
Hi everyone,
we’ve had some great fixes come in since we release 2.3.0 in early December.
Some of those fixes should make it into our user’s hands sooner than later.
I’ve prepared a branch, rebased against 2.3.x so we can use a PR to look over
the differences.
I went through all commits to
I’m also in favor of keeping it really simple and then testing and
measuring it.
What is the best way to measure that we have something that works? I’m not
sure just relying on our current tests will prove that? Should we define
and build some more complex situations e.g docs with lots of
I’m also very much in favour with starting with the simplest thing that can
possibly work and doesn’t go against the advertised best practices of
FoundationDB. Let’s get that going and get a feel for how it all works
together, before trying to optimise things we can’t measure yet.
Best
Jan
—
I’m favour of all that’s outlined here. Thanks for getting this written up,
Joan!
Best
Jan
—
> On 5. Feb 2019, at 19:27, Joan Touzet wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> One thing that has plagued the CouchDB project for a while is the
> introduction of new features without much discussion prior to
