Okay, despite what I said, I got the itch. Here is my proposal for a new query server interface:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JtfvCpNB9pRQyLhS5KkkEdJ-ghSCv89xnw5HDMTCsp8/edit?usp=sharing Please feel free to critique. On 4 April 2013 21:01, Samuel Williams <[email protected]>wrote: > I see. There are many cases when reduce code may need library > functionality. One very important case is when you are dealing with custom > data types, e.g. decimal numbers, that require specific functions to add, > subtract, etc. > > The entire query server interface seems like a huge mess. It would be nice > if there was some way to improve it e.g. CouchDB 2.0 could have an entirely > new query server interface. > > I'd be happy to write a proposal but I wouldn't have time to dedicate to > it unless I knew it was going to be seriously considered. > > > On 4 April 2013 19:21, Alexander Shorin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Samuel! >> >> There is issue with patch about it: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1202 >> >> And there is the explanation why so: >> >> > One other issue: currently I haven't yet implemented commonjs for >> > reduce functions. The reason I have not is that reduce functions are >> > not batched, so library code would have to be sent and eval'd every >> > single time the reduce function is run. On top of this, 99% of the >> > time the reduce function won't make use of the library code, so it >> > will just be dead weight. (I have a hard time thinking of when a >> > reduce function will need to require library code). >> >> >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/couchdb-dev/201009.mbox/%[email protected]%3E >> >> Hope they make things clear (: >> >> -- >> ,,,^..^,,, >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Samuel Williams >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I've implemented a Ruby query server. >> > >> > I wanted to have libraries available to reduce functions. >> > >> > Is it okay to have add_lib add libraries to both mapper context and >> reduce >> > context? >> > >> > The method of loading libraries seems a bit cumbersome in the current >> > implementation, reducers are treated quite differently from mappers. Is >> > there any plan to improve this going forward? >> > >> > Kind regards, >> > Samuel >> > >
