On May 15, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Manuel de la Peña wrote: > On 15 May 2010 14:23, Sven Helmberger <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Manuel de la Peña wrote: >> >>> The whole process does not make bloody sense since >>> they already have the data in memory, why would they push it in the db and >>> read it afterwards??? >>> >>> >> For knowing how the new data is sorted into the views without having a >> second, duplicated instance that figures that out? >> >> Regards, >> Sven >> > > The data is sorted by date and he already knows that, no need to do it It > also means that he is ignoring the fact that the index of the view has to be > recalculated when you do the first request of it. One option fo gwibber to > work correctly, you will simply just add the new messages to the current > view queue while in another thread you add the messages to the db and touch > the views to ensure that they are recalculated. But ofcourse, you do not > need to store the messages, the messages should be retrieved using the REST > APIs and not using CouchDB as a an over eng cache > > Kr, > > Mandel
If it is true that they are doing individual operations instead of batches (doc save/view query loops) then that is the source of their problem. If each query result from facebook / twitter / etc is just saved to CouchDB (in bulk_docs) they will probably get enough better performance that other optimizations won't be necessary. I hope Gwibber / desktopcouch authors get the message. (I haven't noticed slowness but I'm running an Ubuntu VM on SSD) Chris
