couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Brad King" <>
Subject Re: view index build time
Date Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:17:27 GMT
Just to post some results here of working with around 300K docs. I
changed the view to emit only the doc ID and index time went down to
about 25 minutes vs. an hour for the same dataset.

I then converted the largest text field to an attachment and things
went down hill from there. I deleted the db and started the upload,
but repeatedly got random 500 server errors with no real way to know
what is happening or why. Also the DB size as reported by Futon seemed
to fluctuate wildly as I was adding documents. And I mean wildly like
anywhere from 1.2G then back down to 144M. Weird. I don't get a very
warm fuzzy feeling about the stability of using attachments right now.
Ideally, I don't want to use them anyway, I'd prefer to have the
fields all inline and have the database handle these docs as-is. I
don't see these as huge documents (2 to 5K) as compared to what I
would store in something like Berkeley DB XML, just for comparison
sake, so I'm hoping its a goal of the project to handle these
effectively, even when several million documents are added.

As always, thanks for the help.

On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Brad King <> wrote:
> Thanks for the tips. I'll start scaling back the data I'm returning
> and see if it improves. The largest field is an html description of an
> inventory item, which seems like a good candidate for a binary
> attachment, but I need to be able to do full text searches on this
> data eventually (hopefully with the Lucene integration) so I'll
> probably try just not including the document data in the views first.
> We've had some success with Lucene independent of couchdb, so I'm
> pleased you guys are integrating this.
> On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Damien Katz <> wrote:
>> Part of the problem is you are storing copies of the documents into the
>> btree. If the documents are big, it takes longer to compute on them, and if
>> the results (emit(...)) are big or numerous, then you'll be spending most of
>> your time in I/O.
>> My advice is to not emit the document into the view, and if you can, get the
>> documents smaller in general. If the data can stored as an binary
>> attachment, then that too will give you a performance improvement.
>> -Damien
>> On Jun 20, 2008, at 4:51 PM, Brad King wrote:
>>> Thanks, yes its currently at 357M and growing!
>>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Chris Anderson <> wrote:
>>>> Brad,
>>>> You can look at
>>>> ls -lha /usr/local/var/lib/couchdb/.my-dbname_design/
>>>> to see the view size growing...
>>>> It won't tell you when it's done but it will give you hope that the
>>>> progress is happening.
>>>> Chris
>>>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Brad King <> wrote:
>>>>> I have about 350K documents in a database. typically around 5K each.
>>>>> created and saved a view which simply looks at one field in the
>>>>> document. I called the view for the first time with a key that should
>>>>> only match one document, and its been awaiting a response for about 45
>>>>> minutes now.
>>>>> {
>>>>>  "sku": {
>>>>>     "map": "function(doc) { emit(doc.entityobject.SKU, doc); }"
>>>>>  }
>>>>> }
>>>>> Is this typical, or is there some optimizing to be done on either my
>>>>> view or the server? I'm also running on a VM so this may have some
>>>>> effects, but smaller databases seem to be performing pretty well.
>>>>> Insert times to set this up were actually really good I thought, at
>>>>> 4000 to 5000 documents per minute running from my laptop.
>>>> --
>>>> Chris Anderson

View raw message