Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 78336 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2010 15:51:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 5 Jul 2010 15:51:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 98041 invoked by uid 500); 5 Jul 2010 15:51:24 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 98003 invoked by uid 500); 5 Jul 2010 15:51:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 97995 invoked by uid 99); 5 Jul 2010 15:51:23 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 15:51:23 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of volker.mische@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.52 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.161.52] (HELO mail-fx0-f52.google.com) (209.85.161.52) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 15:51:14 +0000 Received: by fxm8 with SMTP id 8so6223040fxm.11 for ; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 08:49:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Pa4film93RUu6T+RQxN6Ue5A2WHffkvsJ/7JWe/ri9I=; b=IKGbi3PzbAjrTbneJ88p8FOs8NAnt9piBcNg5zDZt1CyJ6pgdAKoVlklTaOjOXsxTS PbdXThqisVT2BUZod8jlEukNduk//DKOVucOI5SWsHaM+lz1eQDlXGD2MuTYNrP+uKKr wP49PhFnkZGixFlKOi0KcFCpo3CLF1RWeRZcI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=uLNqRX7zk4wxg8wmlqP0TFWJmtMEhHKnCTkiHdG3115kPsvvs5aR0DcPptApeN1bgn qNv5qq9nB0Lk/C0UDDkwaGFbwLOTBoCwlfK/x/nevHNq4z4L/L+7b12332Fg8BaJMA8+ CaOmQsrMgmt2gmD7kp0mktVsRHwiYn9oRKRZI= Received: by 10.86.63.16 with SMTP id l16mr1879553fga.25.1278344994544; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 08:49:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.3] (dslb-084-056-049-249.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.56.49.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y4sm9457320fag.37.2010.07.05.08.49.52 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 05 Jul 2010 08:49:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C31FF1A.30002@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 17:49:46 +0200 From: Volker Mische User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100423 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Subject: delayed_commits false Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi All, delayed_commits were enabled to have better performance especially for single writers. The price you pay for is that you potentially lose up to one second of writes in case of a crash. Such a setting makes sense, though in my opinion it shouldn't be enabled by default. I expect* that people running into performance issues at least take a look at the README or a FAQ section somewhere. There the delayed_commit setting could be pointed out. I'd like to be able to say that on a vanilla CouchDB it's hard to lose data, but I can't atm. I'm also well aware that there will be plenty of performance tests when 1.0 is released and people will complain (if delayed_commits would be set to false by default) that it is horrible slow. Though safety of the data is more important for me. If the only reason why delayed_commits is true by default are the performance tests of some noobs, I really don't think it's a price worth paying. *I know that in reality people don't I would like to see delayed_commits=false for 1.0 Cheers, Volker