Hi all, The following was written to the user list about a month ago, but received no response so I thought it appropriate to send to the dev list since it might require some more technical know-how. Also, I believe the following is either due to a bug or due to incorrect documentation. Thanks for you help, and please let me know if I should rather post elsewhere and/or post a JIRA.
I have a question regarding the update_seq returned with the two methods: 1. /db/_design/ddoc/_info (in the view_index object) 2. /db/_design/ddoc/_view/view_name?update_seq=true (+ other query strings in principle) I am finding that the update_seq is not always the same between 1 and 2, even though I would expect it to be, at least given the documents: http://couchdb.readthedocs.org/en/1.5.x/api/ddoc/common.html#db-design-design-doc-info http://couchdb.readthedocs.org/en/1.5.x/api/ddoc/views.html The second of which says: "In addition to using stale views, you can also make use of the update_seq query argument. Using this query argument generates the view information including the update sequence of the database from which the view was generated. The returned value can be compared this to the current update sequence exposed in the database information (returned by GET /{db})." I would like to be able to compare the #2 update_seq value with the update_seq gotten from GET /db, but this doesn't seem to be reliable. Here's an example taken from performing 1 and 2 right after each other: 1. {u'name': u'execute_commands', u'view_index': {u'compact_running': False, u'data_size': 9915, u'disk_size': 200822, u'language': u'javascript', u'purge_seq': 0, u'signature': u'6a6068421d1c10bd8819736505b31f4b', u'update_seq': 409478, u'updater_running': False, u'waiting_clients': 0, u'waiting_commit': True}} 2. {u'rows': [{u'key': None, u'value': 50}], u'update_seq': 343094} I think this is due to the fact that this one particular view does not emit that often. The question is, is this expected? That is, should I not expect that the update_seq in 2 is not the same as that in 1? Cheers, Mike
