Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A63051117F for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 13:42:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 98552 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 2014 13:42:14 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 98502 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 2014 13:42:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 98475 invoked by uid 99); 22 Apr 2014 13:42:13 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 13:42:13 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of adam.kocoloski@gmail.com designates 209.85.192.53 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.192.53] (HELO mail-qg0-f53.google.com) (209.85.192.53) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 13:42:07 +0000 Received: by mail-qg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id f51so5286590qge.40 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 06:41:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:content-type:in-reply-to:message-id:date:to :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=2zF0Somtm9HGjQVv4cb26eac4DOu9VZhFLfMHmrMwWk=; b=DO3g62eZ+QbY1A3LPvq+1g4gIuL9/K3HFchTQEQJiAihLfoRE+UfqQ805uyUVu5n+s iDZg4BTiqKYhuAQvTrAcZSgesPrD/UemATD/3XZR/nZl6ldBnnGkl5JWe9xaWXMbFrkD ifas+Ic+3Z3jHhSmxnSNoSnoOa9qdlYjP3dvRHZolyaZBiR4sGs10YOiN4F5ih32/YaX DxhFFQ3TeeKWrklAENoe61KfVhWv4rxKa11EKdGkJMMxCMdKP1gWN8D4LIg+IzK2ANmR 3HwXJ4F14KyPEQBIVlPavbq+VPRfAxexQFjRSLoWt7JyaZYesYJRfAVBfhifDTgYAwTh +YIQ== X-Received: by 10.140.94.179 with SMTP id g48mr45649420qge.58.1398174104739; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 06:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.14.221.194] (mobile-198-228-195-011.mycingular.net. [198.228.195.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v9sm78969117qav.28.2014.04.22.06.41.43 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Apr 2014 06:41:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Compaction of a database with the same number of documents is getting slower over time References: From: Adam Kocoloski Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11D167) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <4721C67B-94F1-4E47-BC9C-90AAFEDA6340@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 09:41:42 -0400 To: "user@couchdb.apache.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org To first order it shouldn't be the case. Is the number of deleted documents growing with time? That'd have an impact. Adam > On Apr 22, 2014, at 8:06 AM, Boaz Citrin wrote: > > Hello, > > Our database contains more or less the same number of documents, however > the documents themselves change frequently. > I would expect that compaction time will be the same, but I see that over > time it takes longer to compact the database. > > Why is it so? Any way to overcome this? > > Thanks, > > Boaz