Update handlers can still fail with a 409. :) B.
On 8 November 2013 21:40, Stanley Iriele <siriele...@gmail.com> wrote: > But no you can't just throw a doc in the db without the latest revision if > it already exists > On Nov 8, 2013 1:39 PM, "Stanley Iriele" <siriele...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I still think you can use update handlers for that...just send the doc >> over the wire... Parse it and save it in the db with the current revision >> of the current doc if it exists...you. Can't do this in bulk... And I think >> what you're trying to Dave is the round trip... Which the update handler >> gives you... >> On Nov 8, 2013 12:54 PM, "Daniel Nephin" <dnep...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Isn't this the default behaviour? >>> >>> All you need to update a document is it's '_id'. Since this is a data >>> warehouse, I assume the ID is already being set by the transaction system, >>> so you don't need to do a lookup. If you PUT a document ( >>> http://docs.couchdb.org/en/latest/api/document/common.html#put--db-docid) >>> using >>> it's ID, it will replace the previous revision. >>> >>> Am I missing something? >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Robert Newson <rnew...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > There is not, not even update handlers can do that, by design. >>> > >>> > B. >>> > >>> > >>> > On 8 November 2013 17:41, Stanley Iriele <siriele...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > Update handlers sound like the way to go here.... >>> > > On Nov 8, 2013 9:39 AM, "Alex Ramos" <i2...@alexramos.net> wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> Is there any way to unconditionally overwrite a document without >>> first >>> > >> making a round-trip to get the current rev? >>> > >> >>> > >> I'm trying to use CouchDB as a data warehouse of sorts and I just >>> need >>> > to >>> > >> overwrite docs with data coming from the transactional system of >>> record >>> > (in >>> > >> MySQL) when they change. >>> > >> >>> > >>> >>
