Can you elaborate on why you want a conflict? I find it confusing to have a conflict when, in fact, there can't be any conflict since nothing has changed.
Marcello 2011/11/23 Szabo, Viktor (Enterprise Infrastructure) <[email protected]>: > Thanks Paul, this makes sense. > > If it counts, I vote for forcing a conflict ;) > > Cheers, > Viktor > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Davis [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 22 November 2011 20:54 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: possible compact bug in 1.1.1 > > > Your example here is actually hitting a very specific edge case as > demonstrated by Marcello's test. As of many versions ago, revisions are > generated using a hashing scheme of the document contents. In your particular > case the requests you're issuing contain the same identical data in such a > way that CouchDB will generate a revision of the doc. > > Given this, we then have to look at how this plays into replication. > Basically, when we merge the revision trees we get to the case where it's > "oh, we already have this version, cool" because we do already have this > version. > > Whether or not that behavior is best, or if we should force a conflict if we > don't add a leaf during a write is another question. In other words, the > system is working fine, but this particular behavior can be a bit unexpected. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > NOTICE: Morgan Stanley is not acting as a municipal advisor and the opinions > or views contained herein are not intended to be, and do not constitute, > advice within the meaning of Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform > and Consumer Protection Act. If you have received this communication in > error, please destroy all electronic and paper copies and notify the sender > immediately. Mistransmission is not intended to waive confidentiality or > privilege. Morgan Stanley reserves the right, to the extent permitted under > applicable law, to monitor electronic communications. This message is subject > to terms available at the following link: > http://www.morganstanley.com/disclaimers. If you cannot access these links, > please notify us by reply message and we will send the contents to you. By > messaging with Morgan Stanley you consent to the foregoing.
