Re: [PATCH] Views: Multiple keys

On 7/23/08, Chris Anderson <jchris-ZB/pdL+efyc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Your patch looks good to me - haven't applied it yet but it seems
>  right. Seeing the unit tests would make it quite clear how to interact
>  with it. For instance, it may be that POSTing to the view url needs
>  more flexibility than just an array of keys. In that case, maybe
>  having the post body look like:
>
>  {"keys":["key1","key2","key3"]} rather than just ["key1","key2","key3"]
>
>  would be more flexible going forward.

Yeah, that's how I was originally doing it, but I decided to just get
it working so I could play around with it first. I was thinking of
allowing a list of docids as well, but I wasn't sure what to do in the
case when somebody passed in both. I guess it should probably be just
one or the other.

>  Having some unit tests around the interaction with the MultiKeys and
>  Count, SkipCount, and StartDocId params would also be helpful I think.

I expected that nobody would want to apply the patch without first
seeing some tests and seeing how the interaction with Count,
SkipCount, etc. would work. I've not had time to do any sort of
extensive testing, but I tried out Count, and it seems to work as
expected. I'll write up some unit tests when I get the chance in the
next day or so and then submit a patch with both those and these
changes.

Does anyone have any thoughts on allowing multi-docid requests?

-- 
Paul Bonser
http://blog.paulbonser.com