But it should not be the case that replication causes duplicates.
Replication uses only idempotent requests, making that unlikely (but
I won't say impossible).
I'm a bit surprised by that. Isn't that something the storage engine's
concurrency control should catch?
Cheers
Jan
--
-Damien
On Jul 15, 2008, at 3:24 PM, Chris Anderson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:40 AM, John Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
FWIW I've been running into these exact same issues.
I'll chime in with a me too. I've worked around it by writing a
client-side replicator, that loads up all docs from both dbs, and
copies any missing docs over to the target db. My requirements mean I
don't need to worry about multiple versions of a doc, so this has
worked for me for the time being. It would be more convenient to have
fast, reliable replication.
I'll commit the replicator to CouchRest this week.
--
Chris Anderson
http://jchris.mfdz.com
