couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Newson <>
Subject Re: ibrowse queue
Date Wed, 07 Apr 2010 22:25:46 GMT
I'm always in favor of increasing rather than static backoffs because
it tolerates more environments (I use

If it did back off this way would it still be necessary to treat
retry_later specially? The proposal not to decrement the retry counter
worries me because an operation that continues to fail should
eventually stop trying; clearly something is more broken than it
should be and adding to the problem is counterproductive.


On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Randall Leeds <> wrote:
> Also, I'm concerned that we cannot rely on couch not to starve the
> reader requests while allowing the missing revs requests, leading to
> an unbounded growth of the reader queue. The reason for this is that
> the reader requests are started with spawn_monitor and therefore
> erlang scheduling might give the reader loop time issue the next
> couch_rep_missing_revs:next/1 call before any or all of the document
> read processes call couch_rep_reader:open_doc_revs/3.

View raw message