couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antony Blakey <antony.bla...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: proposed replication rev history changes
Date Mon, 09 Feb 2009 06:34:37 GMT

On 09/02/2009, at 4:01 PM, Adam Kocoloski wrote:

> Ok, thanks for the clarification.  I don't see any major downsides  
> beyond the ones you already mentioned. The inability to replicate  
> between versions is a bit of a bummer -- I'd want to at least look  
> into a bridge that lets old servers replicate to new ones.
>
> Your point about reducing the chance of collision is a good one,  
> especially since Couch is using a 32 bit sample space for revision  
> IDs.  The probability of zero collisions between any two revisions  
> in a given document history is
>
> N!/((N-M)! * N^M)
>
> with N = 2**32 and M = "max rev history".  With M = 128, that  
> probability drops to 0.999998.  In a 400k document DB where each doc  
> has the max number of revisions it's likely that at least one has a  
> duplicate rev.  That's no good.  I think we could eventually see  
> transient cases of revisions being skipped by the replicator with  
> the trunk code.

If the revision were an SHA hash (admittedly), wouldn't the increased  
value space, AND the fact that identical rev == identical document,  
greatly relieve this problem?

Antony Blakey
--------------------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the  
intelligent are full of doubt.
   -- Bertrand Russell



Mime
View raw message