On 2020-07-16 4:50 p.m., Joan Touzet wrote:
On 2020-07-16 2:24 p.m., Robert Samuel Newson wrote:
Agreed on all 4 points. On the final point, it's worth noting that a
continuous changes feed was two-phase, the first is indeed over a
snapshot of the db as of the start of the _changes
On 2020-07-16 2:24 p.m., Robert Samuel Newson wrote:
Agreed on all 4 points. On the final point, it's worth noting that a continuous
changes feed was two-phase, the first is indeed over a snapshot of the db as of
the start of the _changes request, the second phase is an endless series of
Agreed on all 4 points. On the final point, it's worth noting that a continuous
changes feed was two-phase, the first is indeed over a snapshot of the db as of
the start of the _changes request, the second phase is an endless series of
subsequent snapshots. the 4.0 behaviour won't exactly
>From what I'm reading it sounds like we have general consensus on a few things:
1. A single CouchDB API call should map to a single FDB transaction
2. We absolutely do not want to return a valid JSON response to any
streaming API that hit a transaction boundary (because data
loss/corruption)
3.
