Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:10:25 -0700
From: James Marca <jmarca@translab.its.uci.edu>
To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Message-ID: <20090928211025.GA14179@translab.its.uci.edu>
Mail-Followup-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Subject: unexpected behavior in view generation

Hi All,

I ran across some behavior this weekend that I didn't expect. 

I have a lot of data, and I'm trialing storing the raw data in
CouchDB.  I have 12 databases (manually "sharded" by month), each with
about 115,000,000 documents, and an average size of about 25G.  I
created a view index for each database, and was updating away, when I
noticed a typo in the October database.  I corrected the typo (in
Futon), reloaded the view page (again in futon), and *assumed* that
the old view indexing job was killed and restarted with the new code.
In fact, what happened was that the old, incorrect index job kept
running (for 48 hours) and when it finished, it restarted.

Is this a minor bug, or did I miss an option somewhere?

(The machine I am running this on is running version 0.9.0.  I will
test something similar in the near future on 0.9.1 machine.)

On the plus side, Erlang and CouchDB happily cranked away both loading
the data and then building the views on my 8-core machine, using up
lots of the available processor resources (instead of just max-ing out
one core).  I still wish I could spawn multiple threads per index job,
but since there's no way I could write that code, I'll wait.

Regards,
James Marca

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.