couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com>
Subject Re: Replication vs. Compaction
Date Fri, 31 Jan 2014 17:46:12 GMT
> replication within the same CouchDB server does not use HTTP

It wouldn't matter if it did.  Within the same server linux short-circuits
http to make it the same as unix sockets, i.e. very little overhead.


On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Jason Smith <jhs@apache.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Jens Alfke <jens@couchbase.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2014, at 8:39 AM, Boaz Citrin <bcitrin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Instead we could replicate the database into a new instance and
> > > switchover, as replication is much faster.
> >
> > That seems sort of strange to me -- I would expect replication to an empty
> > db to be slower, as it's doing basically the same work as compaction but
> > with a bunch of HTTP and network overhead. But I don't know the
> > implementation of CouchDB.
> >
>
> I think replication within the same CouchDB server does not use HTTP. But
> yes basically your larger point is correct, at least that is what I thought
> too.
>
> Something else I did not understand from the original post is why
> compaction would cause  offline time? Boaz?
>

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