Thanks!  Okay, I need to reread "_changes" and the "all_or_nothing" on
the bulk_api.  Also "Document Update Handlers" was way too complicated
and wanted a record id for what I was looking to do.  I have a CouchDB
database holding a log and I want to chuck old data easily.  Losing
quick manipulation when switching to CouchDB seems like a barrier of
entry.  I don't know of any situation where I haven't used SQL
(database), sed (ascii document), or other ad hoc concepts to
manipulate records/files/documents.

Thanks for the feedback and it was expedient so thanks for that too.

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 9:45 AM, J Chris Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2010, at 12:01 PM, Michael Genereux wrote:
>
>> Reposting this from the user list.  Figured it belongs in the dev list.
>>
>
> Sorry to leave you hanging for so long. (Vacation weekend!)
>
> There are 2 reasons CouchDB doesn't have this feature. The important one is 
> that it could easily give new users the wrong idea. Coming from a RDBMS 
> background you might expect something like this to be transactional. In 
> Couch, it wouldn't be.
>
> Generally in Couch we've pushed work to the database client. When the client 
> is running on the same box as CouchDB, there would be 0 savings in processing 
> overhead to run these transforms on the server, vs using a application script.
>
> The second reason is the amount of code it would require. If someone wants to 
> write it, there's a decent chance it'd be accepted as a patch (if it were 
> done right.)
>
> Here's how I think it could be implemented (actually a more generic feature 
> that can be used for lots of things.)
>
> A design document could have a ddoc.changes function, which subscribes to the 
> changes feed of the database it runs in. The changes function could then do 
> anything it wanted, like send an email anytime a doc is saved that has a 
> doc.send_me_as_email = true field.
>
> Your use case can be accomplished by having a function that watches to see if 
> any of the docs have a price that hasn't yet been updated, and change the 
> price. So it could load the document, change the price, and set a flag on the 
> document that says doc.price_changed = true. It would ignore any documents 
> that already had price_changed.
>
> This is almost exactly how you would accomplish this at the application 
> level. The only reason to pull such an operation into the design document is 
> that CouchDB would take care of keeping it running, and that there would be a 
> standard way to author a changes listener.
>
> I'm not sure the status of it (node.js is a moving target) but Mikeal has 
> something much like this already on github:
>
> http://github.com/mikeal/node.couch.js/
>
> I'd suggest understanding how this works (and why it's like it is) before 
> thinking about extending CouchDB. The non-transactional nature of CouchDB 
> means you need to understand the _changes feed before you can think about 
> doing anything "complete" like updating all docs that match a given pattern.
>
> Chris
>
>
>> I was doing some ad-hoc UPDATEs and DELETEs on a SQL database the
>> other day and it crossed my mind, how could I do the same on CouchDB?
>> I don't want to write an application to do something so simple.  It
>> seems to me that I should be able to produce a Javascript views, both
>> named and temporary, that in turn produce results that get imported
>> into the CouchDB Bulk Document API as a single transaction.
>>
>> Here's the update example for a 10% increase in prices:
>> function( doc ) {
>> doc.price = doc.price * 1.1;
>> emit( null, doc )
>> }
>>
>> Here's the delete example for old records:
>> function( doc ) {
>> if( doc.year == 2009 ) {
>>  doc._deleted = true;
>>  emit( null, doc )
>> }
>> }
>>
>> Also, much like INSERT ... SELECT notation, this could be used to copy
>> records.  No need for the non-http compliant COPY method that does the
>> same on a single record level.  Changes can be made to the copy on the
>> fly.  Very efficient since the duplication and the update occur in one
>> transaction.
>>
>> Example to duplicate all 'foo' widgets to a set of 'bar' widgets:
>> function( doc ) {
>> if( doc.widget_type == 'foo' ) {
>>  reset( doc );  // helper function that does:
>>                 // delete( doc._id ); delete( doc._rev );
>>                 // and any other special vars in future
>>  doc.widget_type = 'bar'
>>  emit( null, doc )
>> }
>> }
>>
>> I like not having to learn another command, so I reused emit even
>> though bulk api won't use the first field.  If this feature existed,
>> this is how I would have expected to use it knowing that the key
>> parameter has no value in this use of a view.
>>
>> I would love some feedback on this.
>>
>> Michael
>
>

Reply via email to