Talk:Apache CouchDB
Page contents not supported in other languages.
| This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to theApache CouchDB article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies |
| Find sources: Google (books ·news ·scholar ·free images ·WP refs) ·FENS ·JSTOR ·TWL |
 | This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
references needed here
StephenDeGabrielle (talk)13:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence
In February 2008, it became an Apache Incubator project and the license was changed to use the Apache License rather than the restrictive and cumbersome GPL.
seems to contain some pretty subjective and for the subject unnecessary comments about the GPL. If this is supposed to be a quote it should be rewritten to make that clear, otherwise "restrictive and cumbersome" should IMHO be removed. The URL referenced only seems to be about the project being accepted by the Apache Foundation. Comments?Tadanaranu (talk) 06:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)I think you can change that I wouldn't mind a more neutral tone here. (jchris) --24.130.240.73 (talk)02:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Creating a database is simple—just issue the following command:
curl -X PUThttp://127.0.0.1:5984/wiki
I puzzled over this a bit (why does this article on a database engine mention "wiki"?). I suspect this means that the database created will be named "wiki", but I have no experience to confirm this. If I'm right, I suggest the wording:
Creating a database is simple—to create a database named "wiki", just issue the following command:
curl -X PUThttp://127.0.0.1:5984/wiki
I haven't actually made the change, since I don't know what I'm talking about. But at least my confusion is authoritative ;-)
The remaining examples all use this same URL, and I suppose this same database, but I don't think they all need to be changed: the point is made.Jackrepenning (talk)01:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
this main paragraph is IMHO hard to read;
Like otherDocument-oriented database systems, such asLotus Notes, CouchDB is not aRelational Database Management System. Instead of storing data in rows and columns, the database manages a collection ofJSON documents (early versions of CouchDB usedXML). As a result, it is often compared with column-oriented datastores likeGoogle'sBigTable; however, CouchDB is not a column-oriented store, since the documents in a collection need not share aschema.Aggregate functions andfilters are computed in parallel as inMapReduce, rather than at query time (although queries may introduce new aggregate functions, which execute on the existing documents in parallel).
I'd propose the following;
CouchBB is aDocument-oriented database system likeLotus Notes, with
It manages a collection of documents (asJSON though early versions of CouchDB usedXML).
Aggregate functions andfilters are computed inparallel as inMapReduce, rather than at query time. Queries may introduce new aggregate functions, which execute on the existing documents in parallel.
What it is notCouchDB is not a column-oriented store,likeGoogle'sBigTable, since the documents in a collection need not share aschema. CouchDB is not a column-oriented store orRelational Database Management System.
-[Anonymous]
I found the main paragraph easy to understand and I like it the way it is. It probably depends on whether you come from a relational database background. I do, and the author apparently assumes most readers do too. Since relational has been the dominant paradigm for three decades, this is a reasonable assumption. Maybe in five years it will be less so, but we can change the article then.Sluggoster (talk)17:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not happy about the Map-Reduce bit; is the CouchDB version a reimplementation of Googles original, like Hadoop?
StephenDeGabrielle (talk)14:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
According to theMapReduce article, Google did not invent it. Google modified an existing algorithm, enough so that there's a question whether Google should have changed the name too. So whether the article should mention MapReduce hinges on *which* MapReduce. I'm not enough of an expert to comment on that; just wanted to point it out.Sluggoster (talk)17:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
--LeSpocky (talk)10:05, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is this really needed here? Wouldn't think so.92.198.65.186 (talk)10:20, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why is there so much marketing blah in this article?
e.g. the Jacob Kaplan-Moss quote and the context in which it is given.
or this oxymoron:"[...] grants unprecedented control compared to most databases."
It is nice that the authors are fans of the product, but may they please channel that subjectivity to their personal / corporate blog or such instead? The current article could give the impression that the product needs cheap tricks to get more attention.— Precedingunsigned comment added by212.186.3.85 (talk)11:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is CouchDB being abandoned for Couchbase Server? I read most devs from CouchDB are now Couchbase developers. And the Couchbase site gives a lot of emphasis on Membase tech (memcache) rather than the CouchDB paradigm (A RESTful MVCC document database over HTTP). What exactly is the dynamic in place right now?93.172.76.71 (talk)17:38, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
yeah this has finally happened, damian had a lot of friction with the apache org what and he has now left couchdb. look herehttp://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/CouchDB-creator-distances-self-from-Apache-project-1404041.html— Precedingunsigned comment added by123465421jhytwretpo98721654 (talk •contribs)11:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm Mike and I work for Cloudant. I'd like to propose adding a reference tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BigCouch here under the "See also" section. Our database service is built on BigCouch -- the open-source fork of CouchDB that Cloudant created and maintains -- which our engineers are contributing back to the Apache CouchDB project. Cloudant's Wikipedia page includes a reference to CouchDBhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudant, so I thought a reference to BigCouch would make sense here.
Of course I have a COI, so I wanted to do the right thing and submit this to the talk page. As far as I can tell, though, most of the open-source databases listed under "See also" aren't related to CouchDB as closely as BigCouch is. Thanks for considering my suggestion.Mbroberg (talk)00:10, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link onCouchDB. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set thechecked parameter below totrue orfailed to let others know (documentation at{{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)11:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}