couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Hinrichs - DM&T" <dunde...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: replication error
Date Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:09:59 GMT
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Jeff Hinrichs - DM&T
<dundeemt@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Jeff Hinrichs - DM&T
> <dundeemt@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Adam Kocoloski
>> <adam.kocoloski@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Jeff, it's starting to make some more sense now.  How big are the normal
>>> attachments?  At present, Couch encodes all attachments using Base64 and
>>> inlines them in the JSON representation of the document during replication.
>>>  We'll fix this in the 0.9 release by taking advantage of new support for
>>> multipart requests[1], but until then replicating big attachments is iffy at
>>> best.  Regards,
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-163
>>>
>>
>> Hi Adam,
>> Of the 282 attachments, 80 or so are 4-8MB, the others are a couple of
>> hundred k to < 4MB,  each document has 0-2 attachments so the
>> documents vary from < 1M to 9M in size.  There are 188 documents with
>> attachments.  If I built the db with just the 88 largest documents and
>> tried to replicate it would work.
>>
>> When replicating the entire test db there seemed to be some point that
>> the remote machine(.52) could not return attachments fast enough that
>> local would not time out waiting on a response.
> should say:  ...that local would time out waiting on a response...
>> Attempted retries
>> would snowball and the entire process would slow down progressively.
>> The local couch process (.192) would sometimes die completely when it
>> had encountered "too many"  timeout/retry events.  Although this
>> problem I can't replicate without using the entire test db.
>>
>> 0.9.0a739174-incubating seems to be resilient to this scenario.
>> Although I can't replicate without error, the couch process doesn't go
>> away with the same test set.
One final note, replication from local -> local works without error on
the same dataset.  The problems I encountered were only experienced
when replicating between machines.

>> Thank you for you help in this.
>> -Jeff

Mime
View raw message