On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Chris Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Devs, >> >> Following a brief discussion on IRC, I wanted to hear general thoughts >> and objections to introducing creation-time database options. That is, >> allow couchdb databases to toggle some features on or off on a >> per-database basis. Additionally, these options could be changed at >> compaction time. >> >> The first concrete example of such an option would be a feature that >> introduces single-instance storage of attachments. Namely, the >> addition of another btree keyed on the sha1 evaluation of attachments. >> The tree would be used to ensure only one copy of any particular >> attachment exists in the database file. This option could be added or >> removed during compaction also. >> >> Thoughts? > > I think this is a great idea. I'd suggest keeping the db-options in > the #db_header record. Which could get problematic if there get to be > so many options that the header size starts to grow. Maybe there's a > better answer, but this seems most straightforward. >
There's also _local/ documents so that changes to config options don't cause binary incompatibilities. > > -- > Chris Anderson > http://jchrisa.net > http://couch.io >
