The bigcouch merge will not bring any automatic view updating scheduler. Nothing stops someone contributing one, of course.
B. On 20 November 2013 22:49, Mike Marino <[email protected]> wrote: > There are, of course, ways to get couchdb to update views dependent on > writes. I also believe this is supposed to get easier in the future > (included in the bigcouch merge?). > >> Am 20.11.2013 um 23:46 schrieb Simon Metson <[email protected]>: >> >> Nope, views are updated on read, hence the "blocking" behaviour you >> describe. You can query with update_after, which returns the stale index >> then triggers the update. >> >> >>> On Wednesday, 20 November 2013 at 22:43, Mark Hahn wrote: >>> >>> I thought that every write triggered a view rebuild and that the stale >>> option only meant a read didn't have to wait for a current rebuild to >>> finish. That would means the views are pretty much up-to-date. >>> >>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> True, but remember couchdb doesn't automatically keep indexes fresh in >>>> the background, so "stale" can be "really really stale". ;) >>>> >>>> B. >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 20 November 2013 22:34, Simon Metson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Unless your app can deal with querying the view stale. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Wednesday, 20 November 2013 at 21:56, Mark Hahn wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I meant http view requests were blocked. It is waiting for the view >>>>>> rebuild. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm can't type what I'm thinking today. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Mark Hahn <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> never mind. I wasn't talking about the file level at all. I meant that >>>>>>> http read requests are blocked after http update requests. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "DB reads are blocked by DB updates at the http level." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nope, there's a process that can read the database and a separate >>>> one >>>>>>>> for writing to it. Writing to an append only file is obviously >>>>>>>> serialized but there's no need to block reads. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> B. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 20 November 2013 21:35, Mark Hahn <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Database writes are not coupled to view updates. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I understand now, you are talking about file read/write level. DB >>>> reads >>>>>>>>> are blocked by DB updates at the http level. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Robert Newson < >>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "A write requires updating views and reads have to wait for the >>>> update" >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Is not true. Database writes are not coupled to view updates. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 20 Nov 2013, at 20:59, Mark Hahn <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> A write requires updating views and reads have >>>>>>>>>>> to wait for the update >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>
