incubator-couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bob Dionne <dio...@dionne-associates.com>
Subject Re: Simple load-balancing replication best practices
Date Sun, 07 Oct 2012 12:22:32 GMT
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
View raw message