On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:52:27PM -0700, Chris Anderson wrote: > > e.g. a PUT request could specify max_wait=2000 (if not specified, use a > > default value from the ini file). Subsequent requests could specify their > > own max_wait params, and a full commit would occur when the earliest of > > these times occurs. max_wait=0 would then replace the x-couch-full-commit: > > header, which seems like a bit of a frig to me anyway. > > I like the approach you've outlined here. I think the default could > eventually be to allow CouchDB to be adaptive for high throughput, but > we'd have to write that code first. > > Once we have all this, batch=ok could still be meaningful, when the > client wants to be able to send a bunch of serial writes to CouchDB > and is fine with the reduced guarantees that 202 Accepted gives.
Yes, I agree that batch=ok makes sense if it means "just give me a 202 response straight away", and the data will probably make it to disk some time in the future.
