Hi,
didn't have time to look into this until now...
So the 0.9.x branch is not recommended?
I think it should be fine, but it would be a useful data point to
compare to
head.
OT: in another thread I read that the view size is very disk
inefficient. I can also confirm this. In another test run I have
around 5.000 documents in one database consuming 10MB of disk. The
corresponding view file consumes 700MB!! If I understood the remarks
correctly, there is view file compactation in trunk, right?
Are you swapping? Try 'top' then press capital M to look for memory
hogs,
and 'vmstat 2' to watch I/O.
No. 'top' shows that beam uses 40% CPU on a dual core. Memory usage is
at 4% (80MB). 'vmstat; indicates that there is nearly no swapping.
(The system on which CouchDB is running is a AMD dualcore 64bit Ubuntu
with 2GB RAM).
Anything in the logs when it starts to slow down?
Haven't seen anything there yet, but I have just now changed the log
level to debug...
Aside: I would write emit( [field, doc[field] || null], null );
in case doc doesn't have a [field] member. The view server barfs its
guts
if you try to get it to serialise 'undefined'.
I am iterating over the fields of the documents and only then emit the
fields.
Other than that, no I'm afraid I don't have any ideas.
Anyways, thanks for the information. Will dig deeper into this. Can
the 64bit Erlang be a problem?
Daniel
