[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-462?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12742542#action_12742542
]
Damien Katz commented on COUCHDB-462:
-------------------------------------
I think we should reconsider this patch.
For one thing, it's expensive at runtime, it requires doing a linear scan on
the full doc index. If you have millions of docs and no conflicts, it will must
scan through every doc meta record just to tell you that.
Another problem is you don't get any filtering or formatting. Using couchdb
view, a user can construct a view that shows conflicts by author, customer,
area, etc and format the results for display. Using this facility, you get no
formatting or collation options.
I favor backing this change out.
> built-in conflicts view
> -----------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-462
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-462
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: HTTP Interface
> Reporter: Adam Kocoloski
> Fix For: 0.10
>
> Attachments: 462-jan-2.patch, conflicts_view.diff,
> COUCHDB-462-adam-updated.patch, COUCHDB-462-jan.patch
>
>
> This patch adds a built-in _conflicts view indexed by document ID that looks
> like
> GET /dbname/_conflicts
> {"rows":[
> {"id":"foo", "rev":"1-1aa8851c9bb2777e11ba56e0bf768649",
> "conflicts":["1-bdc15320c0850d4ee90ff43d1d298d5d"]}
> ]}
> GET /dbname/_conflicts?deleted=true
> {"rows":[
> {"id":"bar", "rev":"5-dd31186f5aa11ebd47eb664fb342f1b1",
> "conflicts":["5-a0efbb1990c961a078dc5308d03b7044"],
> "deleted_conflicts":["3-bdc15320c0850d4ee90ff43d1d298d5d","2-cce334eeeb02d04870e37dac6d33198a"]},
> {"id":"baz", "rev":"2-eec205a9d413992850a6e32678485900", "deleted":true,
> "deleted_conflicts":["2-10009b36e28478b213e04e71c1e08beb"]}
> ]}
> As the HTTPd and view layers are a bit outside my specialty I figured I
> should ask for a Review before Commit.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
