On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 01:41, Randall Leeds <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestions, Chris. > Link is still here: > http://socghop.appspot.com/document/show/user/rleeds/couchdb_cluster > > I can't seem to access the edit page for the official proposal submission > right now. I get an error. > However, I've done some updates. At this point, I'm hoping that you or > Damien might consider picking this up and decide to endorse it and become a > mentor. Then it's up to the foundation and Google! I suppose if you do decide to, a link to the proposal should probably go here: http://wiki.apache.org/general/SummerOfCode2009#couchdb-project Proposal URL: http://socghop.appspot.com/student_proposal/show/google/gsoc2009/rleeds/t123878289629 It's a shame I can't seem to edit the proposal right now, so maybe a link to the document version since it's more up-to-date? > > > Either way, I want to be involved in this work :) > > Cheers, > Randall > > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 16:30, Chris Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> From the proposal: >> > 2. Fast http proxy writen in Erlang which leverages the consistent hash >> for determining destinations >> >> You might find it simpler to use Erlang messaging instead of http in >> the proxy layer. I'm not certain about this but it might end up >> simpler and faster in the long run. There are arguments in favor of >> http, so I'd say the choice is yours, but keep in mind someone will >> eventually attempt the other way, no matter which you chose. > > > Yeah, this is what I had in mind after we talked and I wrote this wrong. > > >> >> > August 10 - Submit patches for review, discussion and polishing >> >> I think it would make for a smoother process if you attempt to >> integrate as you go. It'll mean identifying the smallest useful chunks >> of work, to get us from here to there, but it's also the open-source >> way, and I think it results in better code. Nothing like having what >> you're working on being used in real applications. >> >> Can you identify the very first step? - maybe it's an integration test >> in JavaScript that proves that three dbs (on one host) can have >> document ids partitioned correctly. (I think a core thing here is >> getting the right validation functions on the right db's, so they >> reject bad PUTs) > > > I finally got around to a crack at adding some JS test examples. > I'd like to add some examples about querying partition setup, etc, but then > again, that might just be in the _design doc. There are so many questions > unsettled still that I feel like what I added is probably enough to get a > feel for it. > >
