Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 64920 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2010 15:45:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Feb 2010 15:45:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 23097 invoked by uid 500); 4 Feb 2010 15:45:33 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 23005 invoked by uid 500); 4 Feb 2010 15:45:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 22965 invoked by uid 99); 4 Feb 2010 15:45:33 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:45:33 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.188 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.210.188] (HELO mail-yx0-f188.google.com) (209.85.210.188) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:45:25 +0000 Received: by yxe26 with SMTP id 26so2450641yxe.28 for ; Thu, 04 Feb 2010 07:45:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5UJ3x3dqkTC7uBSgI+h/u+5WAbJoB926cHASYyTllRU=; b=Fyl6UrSxb5rZjkWxMdkNg3bO3LpTSZGLaRt3NtAp4xAEOlsHRt15yLHhX8017n629n M8TzdNFjhqgo5pI3IM7hpIairkR4iAoq1SpH5YzqEoFSzoeOV9/y/aqE4toRMwmFm7NC RQBG8AIeRcvahHl5nbW3lKdJtkpxC/JIYsfgc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=bkC2bQq6SbB4aW0KltxV+B/R8rCvt0rTn2faCUt60kI8e88o+P1OJql/1fVBHMDfeY Mtv34VvRp8gcTrlD51yfLjwHcBDnzSWiBYQzUD5/32ZPjjvSOFEj/mWve2dOPEeQ9yT6 t+4QPDTeu5JBemg/BIG2fteWBnnx9XXkqlSh0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.101.180.11 with SMTP id h11mr1318205anp.31.1265298301135; Thu, 04 Feb 2010 07:45:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7CBFD4B9-23DB-4626-9FC6-81095E1A4161@apache.org> References: <46aeb24f1002021341h3a3e6a62l9ab92274646f2c74@mail.gmail.com> <20100203095327.GA8099@uk.tiscali.com> <7CBFD4B9-23DB-4626-9FC6-81095E1A4161@apache.org> From: Paul Davis Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 10:44:40 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: associating UUIDs to DBs To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Adam Kocoloski wrote= : > On Feb 3, 2010, at 4:53 AM, Brian Candler wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:41:28PM +0000, Robert Newson wrote: >>> If couchdb tracked replication by a Merkle tree, it would obsolete the >>> update_seq mechanism? >> >> Only if you weren't doing filtered/selective replication. And probably o= nly >> if there was nothing else different between the two databases (e.g. _loc= al >> docs, _design docs, reader acls etc) > > Correct, Merkle trees are only useful if you expect the two databases to = be completely identical. =A0But Bob's right, I'm essentially proposing that= our by_seq btree is extended into a full Merkle tree for this particular u= se-case. > > Adam Most intriguing. Could you expand on that a bit? Paul