Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Message-ID: <5723146.95221274140737624.JavaMail.jira@thor>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 19:58:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Randall Leeds (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Closed: (COUCHDB-763) duplicate and or missing revisions in
 changes feed
In-Reply-To: <14396305.94101274138682017.JavaMail.jira@thor>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-763?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Randall Leeds closed COUCHDB-763.
---------------------------------

    Fix Version/s: 0.12
       Resolution: Fixed

I'm gonna mark this as closed then and hope it doesn't come up again once we've migrated.
Out of curiosity, I'd love to know what commit fixed this or what the issue was.

> duplicate and or missing revisions in changes feed
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: COUCHDB-763
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-763
>             Project: CouchDB
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Database Core
>    Affects Versions: 0.10.1
>            Reporter: Randall Leeds
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 0.12
>
>
> I have no idea if this is unique to 0.10.1 or if it shows up on 0.11/trunk since I have no clue how to repro.
> If we can identify why this happens we should work to be very sure it's fixed.
> I see something like the following in my changes feed (taken from consecutive lines of an actually changes feed):
> {"seq":36527,"id":"anonymized_docid","changes":[{"rev":"2186-967dbcd9d960b77955fcf6048fb219cc"}]},
> {"seq":36530,"id":"anonymized_docid","changes":[{"rev":"2188-ae8481b29fd3a42d5190aba7c13a522b"}]},
> I was under the impression that _changes only showed the newest revision for any document.
> Furthermore, the first of these two is actually missing. Querying the document with ?revs_info=true shows it as such and this is confirmed by trying to query for ?rev=2186-967dbcd9d960b77955fcf6048fb219cc
> 1) Missing revisions should never show up in changes
> 2) Changes shouldn't list a document twice
> 3) This makes replication impossible since the reader tries to open missing revisions.
> Mostly for number (3) I'm marking this as critical.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.