[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13490527#comment-13490527
]
Robert Newson commented on COUCHDB-1259:
----------------------------------------
Benoit, are you vetoing this change? If so, please include a reason why
improving the hit rate for replication checkpoints should not be included in
our next release.
Everyone else, please comment on the patch itself, I want feedback on 1) the
quality and correctness of the patch and 2) whether, when using UUID, whether
it is correct to use UUID instead of the {Scheme, UserInfo, UUID, Path} tuple
that I've chosen as I would prefer to simply use the UUID if it's correct to do
so for clarity.
https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/35
> Replication ID is not stable if local server has a dynamic port number
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-1259
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1259
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Replication
> Affects Versions: 1.1
> Reporter: Jens Alfke
> Assignee: Robert Newson
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 1.3
>
> Attachments: couchdb-1259.patch, couchdb-1259.patch
>
>
> I noticed that when Couchbase Mobile running on iOS replicates to/from a
> remote server (on iriscouch in this case), the replication has to fetch the
> full _changes feed every time it starts. Filipe helped me track down the
> problem -- the replication ID is coming out different every time. The reason
> for this is that the local port number, which is one of the inputs to the
> hash that generates the replication ID, is randomly assigned by the OS. (I.e.
> it uses a port number of 0 when opening its listener socket.) This is because
> there could be multiple apps using Couchbase Mobile running on the same
> device and we can't have their ports colliding.
> The underlying problem is that CouchDB is attempting to generate a unique ID
> for a particular pair of {source, destination} databases, but it's basing it
> on attributes that aren't fundamental to the database and can change, like
> the hostname or port number.
> One solution, proposed by Filipe and me, is to assign each database (or each
> server?) a random UUID when it's created, and use that to generate
> replication IDs.
> Another solution, proposed by Damien, is to have CouchDB let the client work
> out the replication ID on its own, and set it as a property in the
> replication document (or the JSON body of a _replicate request.) This is even
> more flexible and will handle tricky scenarios like full P2P replication
> where there may be no low-level way to uniquely identify the remote database
> being synced with.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
