I've radically simplified the language on the wiki. It doesn't bother describing the history of this feature and just cuts right to it.
B. On 23 December 2012 15:24, Ciprian Dorin Craciun <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: >> A meta-point, is that the precise semantics of all_or_nothing:true, >> and uses of it, are at least partially stepping away from a core >> notion in CouchDB, that we're document-oriented, that we consciously >> don't provide group update semantics, knowing that they are difficult >> to scale. >> >> Anyway, Xmas lecture over. :) I think, as long as you avoid >> replication, then your hack will work with current all_or_nothing:true >> behavior, I just worry that you're avoiding embracing the document >> model by doing so. > > > Thank you very much for your explanation! This was what I was > looking for. :) > > Now about your observation related to the CouchDB document-centric > design, indeed you are right: starting to use such semantics that make > promises at other levels of granularity than a document, will depart > from the "core" model of CouchDB, and in the long term will get the > developer in all kind of strange situations. (But using such features > sparingly would solve some issues that are otherwise too complicated.) > > Thanks again, > Ciprian.
