On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Zachary Zolton <[email protected]> wrote: > @jchris is that similar to what you meant? >
Pretty much. Go for it! > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Zachary Zolton > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I've been thinking, if there was just a reasonable way to replicate >> another database with the output of a view, then you could just write >> regular one-pass map/reduce views on the "derived" database. >> >> That would seem to cause fewer ripples across the codebase. >> >> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Chris Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Zachary Zolton >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Devs, >>>> >>>> Has there been any discussion of using multiple rounds of map/reduce >>>> for CouchDB views? >>>> >>>> If were possible, and the view could be indexed within acceptable >>>> bounds of memory and processing time, I could see using it situations >>>> where the current one-pass solution proves difficult or requires >>>> multiple queries. >>> >>> I think the simplest way to add value would be to make a way to bounce >>> a group_level reduce query to documents in another database. Then you >>> could use views to sort them by value etc. >>> >>>> >>>> Also, I tend to be daft, so I'd appreciate hearing if this idea is >>>> silly or simply outside of the scope of CouchDB! >>>> >>> >>> >>> I think it sounds great. >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> -- >>> Chris Anderson >>> http://jchrisa.net >>> http://couch.io >>> >> > -- Chris Anderson http://jchrisa.net http://couch.io
