couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benoit Chesneau <>
Subject Re: delayed_commits false
Date Wed, 07 Jul 2010 06:31:58 GMT
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 3:56 AM, Robert Newson <> wrote:
> I had started a page to capture the nuances of these settings at
> but never finished
> it. It's possible some of the prose could be reshaped into a concise
> summary of the difficult balancing act we're attempting here.
> For what it's worth, I'd prefer to keep this setting as-is for 1.0.
> Having several 'durability profiles' to choose from would be very
> neat, though, and displaying the current profile prominently in Futon
> should convey the message far better than docs or wiki. Consider how
> often the 'admin party' text gets people thinking about locking down
> their server...
> B.
I dislike to have too much options though.

I don't understand this "keep it for 1.0" mantra. Since it's more a
"philosophical" change than a technical one, I would prefer that
change on 1.0 whatever this number means. How do people  use CouchDB
in production ? Is delayed_commit turned off most of the time ?

About the use on laptop and co, laptops are likely less stable than
server machines, and we tend to shutdown them more often too. With
delayed_commit=True, when someone shutdown his laptop and forget to
apply delayed commit (and most of the time, if we don't automatize
that, I bet he will), data in memory will be lost.

 As a user of openbsd, one of the reasons I use this system (except
its simplicity) is that it is secured by default on the contrary most
linuxes/bsds aren't. Most of the openbsd users know that security will
impact performances. I think I would prefer to have a completly safe
couchdb even if performances decreased.

- benoit.

View raw message