At http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/HTTP_Bulk_Document_API I see the following:
"Bulk updates work independently of replication, meaning document revisions originally saved as part of an all or nothing transaction will be replicated individually, not as part of a bulk transaction. This means other replica instances may only have a subset of the transaction, and if an update is rejected by the remote node during replication (e.g. not authorized error) the remote node may never have the complete transaction." I had a vague idea from the original discussions that these transactions would remain together, but this appears to be wrong. I'd just like to ask if the lack of boundaries for replication is intentional behaviour, or just an artefact of the current implementation which might change? I can think of circumstances where it might be useful to keep them together. Consider, for example, an all_or_nothing transaction which is used to resolve a conflict between three documents: it does this by writing a new revision, and deleting the other two revisions. If this set of updates became split upon replication, it might end up deleting the two old revisions but not updating the other document; thus you would have lost data from those two revisions. Any thoughts or comments? Regards, Brian.
