-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Chris Anderson wrote: >> It sounds like Couch does just fine if you run compaction. Perhaps we >> should recommend view compaction more aggressively.
The compacted file sizes are still a little large, but tolerable. The problem is that view data is not replicated. So I can't for example generate a view, reduce it and then replicate to 50 machines. If the view required 20GB to generate then each of those machines needs an additional 20GB of storage, not to mention all the CPU time and I/O. BTW In my case I am not using reduce and its usage also seems far rarer, so deliberately using a file format that consumes an excessive amount of space just in case is not a good optimization. And for the vast majority of people the reduce doesn't need transactional levels of consistency anyway. For example having tag counts be completely accurate (to some point in time) by consuming 27GB of space for a 1GB data set is not good! Roger -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAktOVLkACgkQmOOfHg372QQ0UACgqBPDOfGw+ViIPTHINMfGr79C hJ4AnRQNxUoQ5CnPlxkg+giJa3w8GPnf =Dscn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
