On Sep 25, 2012, at 5:59 PM, Mark Hahn <[email protected]> wrote: > I am already using a scheme that requires me to store the latest revision > number for every doc in memory. You scheme would also require that and it > would cause extra reads. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Sure, it requires extra reads if the _changes feed skipped a revision, but it seems like the skipped revision and the read cancel out, so it’s the same amount of work as if you’d gotten every revision. Is any of this worse than rewriting your app? :) —Jens
