Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Memory filter implementation/improvements #143

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 12, 2015

Conversation

ssevertson
Copy link
Contributor

Implement filters compatible with CouchDB for the Memory engine.

Based loosely on the old memory-filters branch, plus reading through the CouchDB view.js file to ensure compatibility.

Includes test cases.

…sed loosely on the old memory-filters branch, and on review of the CouchDB engine code
…perations, as the active memory engine instance may have been changed after resource definition.
@jcrugzz
Copy link
Member

jcrugzz commented Dec 19, 2014

This looks good at first glance. cc @indexzero

@yashafromrussia
Copy link

Could this be committed to one of the newest branches please? We have a production environment using couchdb - and it's all fine. But for testing we're using memory store and it fails every time when using filters. Thank you!!!

@Fishrock123
Copy link

@jcrugzz @indexzero could this be looked at? Using filters is causing our tests to break, since they use memory.

I can confirm this pr allows to tests to work like they did before we implemented some filters.

@jcrugzz
Copy link
Member

jcrugzz commented Jan 12, 2015

@Fishrock123 yea this does look good after closer inspection. Merging

jcrugzz added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 12, 2015
Memory filter implementation/improvements
@jcrugzz jcrugzz merged commit 3461dd3 into flatiron:master Jan 12, 2015
@jcrugzz
Copy link
Member

jcrugzz commented Jan 12, 2015

Published as 0.3.5

@Fishrock123
Copy link

Thanks! 🚢

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants