My favorites | Sign in
Project Home
New issue   Search
  Advanced search   Search tips   Subscriptions
Issue 112: AttachmentField for schema
4 people starred this issue and may be notified of changes. Back to list
Status:  New
Owner:  ----

Sign in to add a comment
Reported by, Jan 22, 2010
It would be nice to be able to have an AttachmentField type available in the 
schema that stores a Python string as a document attachment. This would be 
great for more efficient storage of large text snippets.

I tried figuring out how to implement this myself, but my head is still reeling 
from trying to understand how the schema stuff works :)
Jan 23, 2010
I recently did something similar on a project of mine where I used a UserDict object to 
wrap the json object and implemented lazy fetching on access to any attachments.

Seems like something I should take a crack at here (not the UserDict, but lazily fetched 
attachment objects).
Jan 27, 2010
I've just spent a lot of time reading and understanding the code, especially the 
metaclass and descriptor bits and think I'm starting to get a handle on it now.

One thing about lazy loading that kind of throws a wrench in to the works is that the 
instances of Document would need to retain a reference to the database they were last 
loaded from in order for it to work. In that case I'm not sure how to handle the behavior 
in the case the database could not be reached any more.
Jan 28, 2010
By "database could not be reached" do you mean the Python reference or the actual HTTP 
resource? Tracking the Python ref should be achievable using a weakref. The HTTP resource 
could be unavailable at any time so best to just fail in the usual way.

Perhaps more importantly, keeping hold of a database reference for attachment fields may 
affect the current API.

At the moment, you save a schema document by calling but lazy 
attachment retrieval would implicitly use the database the document was loaded from. 
Probably ok; I can't think of any reason to do something else.

What about storing the document's new/updated attachments? When does that happen - when 
the attachment is set or when is called? Should then hang on to this database arg's reference for future 
attachment gets? Do attachment updates get sent as inline attachments or does make multiple HTTP requests?
Jan 28, 2010
As soon as I posted the above I realised that saving attachments when 
is called is not a good idea for a couple of reasons:

1. Sending the attachment inline may unexpectedly affect memory usage if it turns out 
to be a big chunk of text.

2. Making multiple requests could mean that the initial document update works an 
attachment update fails. would have to raise an exception but it would 
be up to the application to work out what failed, how many requests had succeeded, 

Perhaps if the field type was called SmallChunkOfTextStoreAsAnAttachmentField the 
inline attachment option might work out ok. ;-)
May 21, 2010
Will inline attachments be added?
Feb 5, 2012
#6 kxepal

Attachments could be streamed[1] on document saving and loading if `Content-Type: multipart/related` header is specified, so I suppose we could use this trick. However, looks like it's not recommended to use this way to load document with all attachments and I'd like to agree with it. How to fix this case? Replace attachment data with some `read(db)` function that retrieves attachment data, implicitly using document id, rev and target attachment name? Surely, some tests are needed, but looks like there is nothing impossible(:

Jul 15, 2014
Project Member #7 djc.ochtman
This issue has been migrated to GitHub. Please continue discussion here:
Sign in to add a comment

Powered by Google Project Hosting