i wonder if i understand you well ... sometimes you want to explicitly store "null" as a value in couchdb (as opposed to not storing the entire key in the first place)?
On 10/09/2010 05:39 PM, John Logsdon wrote: > Many thanks Heiko - That works on a method level so doesn't affect the > properties in my objects that need null as a value (Yes, the irony hasn't > escaped me.......). > > I love couchdb. > > > > On 9 October 2010 15:57, Heiko Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey John, >> >> maybe the jackson annotation @JsonWriteNullProperties(false) could help >> you? >> >> cheers, >> Heiko >> >> >> On 10/09/2010 04:24 PM, John Logsdon wrote: >>> I understand the difference but i'm not sure it's really an issue. >>> >>> My request is born out of convenience as i'm using a statically typed >>> language (Java), a json parser(jackson) with auto marshalling and I'm >> trying >>> to use the same java beans regardless of whether it's a new Object or >>> existing since I have rather a lot of classes to store in couchdb. >>> >>> It may be possible to fix this in the client but I thought it was worth >>> asking! >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> On 8 October 2010 23:50, Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 6:43 PM, John Logsdon <[email protected] >>>> wrote: >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to be able to support the following scenario: >>>>> >>>>> curl -XPOST -H"Content-Type: application/json" >> http://localhost:5984/uta-d >>>>> '{"_id": null, "_rev":null,"x":"y"}' >>>>> >>>>> Which returns: >>>>> >>>>> {"error":"bad_request","reason":"Document id must be a string"} >>>>> >>>>> I'd like the above to work the same as this command: >>>>> >>>>> curl -XPOST -H"Content-Type: application/json" >> http://localhost:5984/uta-d >>>>> '{"x":"y"}' >>>>> >>>>> which returns: >>>>> >>>>> >> {"ok":true,"id":"c9fd97f3eb58fdb62ef7a80440001662","rev":"1-935564bc7ec7e86aa82ecec3face18f6"} >>>>> Is there a reason why couchdb doesn't do the same action on a null >>>> _id/_rev >>>>> as it does when the fields aren't present? >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> >>>>> John >>>>> >>>> A value of null is not equivalent to no value. Null is a value and its >>>> not a valid document id. Hence, the error. >>>> >>>> I don't like the idea of silently discarding it and creating a new >>>> document with a random doc id. I can see this causing lots of >>>> headaches when someone has a bug and doesn't realize their code is >>>> just creating random documents. >>>> >>>> Paul Davis >>>> >>> >> >
