On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Adam Kocoloski <[email protected]> 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 only >> if there was nothing else different between the two databases (e.g. _local >> docs, _design docs, reader acls etc) > > Correct, Merkle trees are only useful if you expect the two databases to be > completely identical. But Bob's right, I'm essentially proposing that our > by_seq btree is extended into a full Merkle tree for this particular use-case. > > Adam
Most intriguing. Could you expand on that a bit? Paul
