Paul, Usually it's the other way around. The replica DB usually stays smaller than the source DB (unless the target DB was already populated). This is so because doing a replica is similar to a DB compaction in many ways.
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Paul Bonser <[email protected]> wrote: > I think that's pretty typical behavior, since it's append-only > re-building any views you have. Try compacting the views and database > and see if it's still bigger. My guess is that it won't be. > > I have a DB which did about the same thing. I replicated from one > machine to another, and it grew from 209MB to a little less than a GB, > then after compacting, it's back down to 209MB. Though in my case the > same thing happened during my initial insert of the data, too, because > I was reading from the DB as I was doing the inserts (and thus the > views were being rebuilt, ballooning the file). > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Bharat Bharat <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi, I am seeing a very bizzare issue with couchdb 0.11 replication. > > > > When I try to replicate a database from my local machine (mac OSX) to a > > remote machine( on a different network), it replicates all documents but > > size of the document on the remote machine goes up around 10 times and it > > eventually fails. > > > > eg: Host machine: 450 docs, ~45 MB > > Target machine after replication: 450 docs, ~ 400 MB > > > > Interestingly, the other way works fine. Ie, if I try to pull this > database > > from host machine to this remote machine, it replicates fine. > > > > Has anyone encountered this or something similar? I dont have big > > attachments. > > > > Thanks very much! > > > > -- > Paul Bonser > http://probablyprogramming.com > -- Filipe David Manana, [email protected] "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
