On Nov 5, 2012, at 08:54 , Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote:
> btw sound like jira isn't handling mails now so we should continue > this discussion on the ticket. It never has, to my knowledge. IIRC it works with GitHub Issues/Pull Requests, but not here. Would be a great feature though. Cheers Jan -- > > On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Dustin Sallings <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> >>> writes: >>> >>>>> 1. My home couchdb server (by hostname, only available from inside my >>>>> house) >>>>> 2. My work couchdb server (by hostname, available inside and outside, >>>>> but the IP addresses are different in each location). >>>>> 3. Iriscouch (by hostname, available everywhere on the same address) >>>>> >>>>> In all three cases, it can stop replication, but will resume again if >>>>> I restart. >>>>> >>>> Most of these cases already work if you are using the new _replicator api. >>> >>> If you're referring to the replicator DB, then yes, that's the way >>> I set up all my replications, and why it starts back up when I restart. >>> >>>>> Under what circumstances do you consider "stop replicating after >>>>> sleep, but start again if the user restarts CouchDB" good behavior? >>>> >>>> - local replications should always restart. >>>> - replication with remote should restart only if the remote didn't >>>> change and my network didn't change. >>>> >>>> In other cases I need to rely on a mecanism to validate that I can >>>> continue the replication. In that case I agree it can be automated and >>>> we have different solution to do it. But that should never be a >>>> default mecanism imo. >>> >>> Let's assume what you're saying is OK and that the real bug here is >>> that it *does* restart when I kill and restart CouchDB... >> >> Any log in couch? Does it simply stop the replication? >>> >>> The one that I notice the most is an application that collects data in >>> my house that replicates to my laptop. The *only* time this can >>> possibly work is when my laptop is on my home LAN. That means, for it >>> to start properly, it has to be connected to my home LAN before I ever >>> see anything. >>> >>> Then I go somewhere else. Let's assume the somewhere else has a >>> host named "menudo" (which is the unfortunate hostname of the machine in >>> my house running CouchDB). Because I'm on a different network, the >>> replicator decides it's probably not the menudo I'm looking for, so it >>> ceases replication. >>> >>> When I go back home, shouldn't it start back up? >> >> At this point the replication should be stopped because it retried >> too many time on your other network. I am not sure anyway that it is >> desirable to restart it from the old replication doc at least without >> checking that the remote is the remote. >> >> >>> >>> Doesn't this whole thing get a lot more simple and inline with what >>> any reasonable user might expect if you just say, "configured >>> replications run as configured"? >> >> I agree, that it is interresting to have such features and i know at >> least 2 projects proposing layers to handle that. Imo that is >> requiring a small change in the the replicator client to check the >> remote and eventually associate a remote id to an replication id and >> change have a mapping [remote id, {Host, Port}] that is change after a >> conversation with the remote node. That is this part that should be >> switchable so for people that want it they could eventually check >> against a node id . The logic depends on the application policy imo. >> >> - benoît
