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 <[email protected]>wrote: > > 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 ensure that there are no > single-node-only applications which don't scale to clustered operation. This > means that "deployments where you are not doing replication" isn't a > relevant distinction as far as the CouchDB model is concerned. > > IMO this is a questionable decision, but I'm in the minority. > > Antony Blakey > ------------- > CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd > Ph: 0438 840 787 > > The difference between ordinary and extraordinary is that little extra. > > > -- David W. Van Couvering I am looking for a senior position working on server-side Java systems. Feel free to contact me if you know of any opportunities. http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidvc http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com http://twitter.com/dcouvering
