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.
>
> Thank you for you help in this.
> -Jeff
>
--
Jeff Hinrichs
Dundee Media & Technology, Inc
jeffh@dundeemt.com
402.218.1473
web: www.dundeemt.com
blog: inre.dundeemt.com
|