couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Octavian Damiean <mainer...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Simple load-balancing replication best practices
Date Sun, 07 Oct 2012 12:32:30 GMT
I'd be interested to read that if you insert the URL too Bob. :)

On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Bob Dionne <dionne@dionne-associates.com>wrote:

> There used to be an advantage to using PULL but that's no longer the case.
>
> However PULL replications are a bit more stable when attachments are
> involved, so I'd recommend them over PUSH. I've described the problem
> here[1] in BigCouch if you're interested in the details.
>
> On Oct 7, 2012, at 5:04 AM, Nick North <north.n@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm also interested in whether there is a preference for push or pull
> with
> > CouchDb 1.2. I have a full-mesh replication setup using pull replication,
> > but have no idea whether push might be better in some way. Is there a
> > replication guru out there who could enlighten us?
> > Nick
> > On 4 October 2012 17:48, Dave Cottlehuber <dch@jsonified.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 4 October 2012 17:04, Steve Koppelman <steve.koppelman@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Assuming a hubless (i.e. not master-slave) set of 4 couchdb 1.2.0
> >>> servers behind a load balancer, is there a recommended best-practice
> >>> for setting up the replication relationships? I'm most interested in:
> >>>
> >>> * Assuming the _replicator document is on one of the two nodes in a
> >>> relationship, is there a preference for push vs. pull replication
> >>> relationships? I seem to recall pull as being regarded as more
> >>> reliable than push through 1.1.1.
> >>
> >> Hope somebody else comments on this, I'm interested to know if this
> >> still makes a difference.
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message