I'm not sure if I like the idea of having two ways accessing one functionality. One that will always work and one, that might or might not work, depending on the input (size). On 21.09.2010, at 15:55, Zachary Zolton wrote:
> You're also better off caching GET requests than POST requests, should > the need ever arise. > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:09 AM, Michael Fellinger (JIRA) > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> [ >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-891?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12912874#action_12912874 >> ] >> >> Michael Fellinger commented on COUCHDB-891: >> ------------------------------------------- >> >> If you don't know the size of the keys, you can use POST, I'm not advocating >> this as a replacement, but as an alternative. >> My typical usage is to lookup up to a handful of keys, of known size, that >> fit comfortably in any URI. >> >> I recently hit an issue while trying to implement a _list document for >> FreeSWITCH (FS) configuration, that is queried directly. >> Unfortunately, i cannot redirect or rewrite the request for a _list with >> keys via POST, and I cannot modify the way FS does its queries, so I had to >> put a middleware in front just to handle this query for me. >> With GET, it would be trivial to handle this case, I'd leave it to the >> developer to decide whether to use GET or POST. >> >>> Allow ?keys=["a","b"] for GET to _view and _list >>> ------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Key: COUCHDB-891 >>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-891 >>> Project: CouchDB >>> Issue Type: New Feature >>> Components: HTTP Interface >>> Affects Versions: 1.0.1 >>> Environment: - >>> Reporter: Michael Fellinger >>> Priority: Minor >>> Fix For: 1.0.2 >>> >>> >>> The idea was already described back in 2008 when the POST >>> {"keys":["key1","key2"]} API was introduced. >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/couchdb-dev/200811.mbox/%[email protected]%3e >>> I'm looking at the source right now, but can't figure out how to implement >>> this at the moment, and I'd love this to be part of CouchDB proper. >> >> -- >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >> - >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. >> >>
