On Apr 19, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Eric Casteleijn wrote: > On 04/19/2010 10:22 AM, Adam Kocoloski wrote: >> On Apr 19, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Eric Casteleijn wrote: > >>> I still wonder in that case if there is something you can do to >>> shrink the stored views somewhat: gwibber had a number of views that >>> emitted the whole document, but those documents (typically >>> representing a twitter or identi.ca message) weren't very large in >>> themselves. My database, after compaction was something between 70 >>> and 80 MB, whereas the indexes took over a GB. Since >>> gwibber+desktopcouch run on the desktop, where only one client >>> typically talks to couch, I still think we made the right decision >>> to sacrifice speed for diskspace. On a server, both are important >>> though, considering we host multiple couchdbs per user. Luckily we >>> don't compute the views for the gwibber dbs server side, but I'm >>> sure it's something we'll run into again elsewhere. > > >> Were the view indices also compacted? If so, that's very surprising >> to me. I should double-check our numbers, but I seem to remember >> the compacted view indices for our case (which had similarly-sized >> documents) being comparable in size to the DBs. > > I believe so, unless compacting view indices is a separate process > that is not triggered by compacting a database?
Yep, it's a separate process. You can trigger it by POSTing to /dbname/_compact/groupname, or by navigating to the Compact & Cleanup dialog in Futon (0.11+). Best, Adam
