Ah. My mistake.
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 16:32, Adam Kocoloski <[email protected]> wrote: > The view generation status updates ignore old MVCC versions completely. > We're a bit inconsistent in that department - the replicator reports the > current sequence number, but the view updater reports the number of documents > that have been loaded into memory so far. As a result, I wouldn't expect the > number of obsolete updates to affect the perceived view updater progress > much at all. Best, > > Adam > > On Nov 4, 2010, at 5:27 PM, Randall Leeds wrote: > >> I'm more interested to know if compacting the database before building >> the view helps. >> >> If you have many document updates it could be that the density of new >> changes is higher at the end of the database file. In other words, the >> I/O bottleneck isn't caused by a large file but but maybe reading more >> information. Much of the early parts of the by-sequence btree may have >> been overwritten by new changes and therefore ignored in view >> generation. >> >> For example, if you have a database of 1 document with 1 million >> changes, you would expect the view generation to roll through the >> first 999k changes very quickly. >> >> -Randall >> >> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 04:07, cdr53x <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 11/04/2010 11:55 AM, Nils Breunese wrote: >>>> >>>> Also after compaction? >>>> >>> >>> Yes after compaction. ;) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >
