Idk..it sounds hackey.. But curl and crontab is good enough for me for the views that can't fall more than 1 minute behind On Nov 20, 2013 2:57 PM, "Robert Newson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> >
