Thanks for explaining. Your explanation for filtered replications was my guess, but I thought I would mention it anyway.
-- Andreas ________________________________ From: Filipe David Manana <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; Andreas Kemkes <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 12:40 PM Subject: Re: Replication and checkpoints - what to expect? On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Andreas Kemkes <[email protected]> wrote: > The bump was by mistake, I wanted to add to it (i.e., stalling replication - > see other reply). Thanks for answering. > > It should report 100% in my opinion if it has caught up with the current > source sequence, even though in the future there might be more. That is the case for continuous replications. When target has caught up with the source, it goes to 100%. When source gets new stuff, target will report a progress < 100% for some time, and then eventually back to 100%. > > The same should be true for filtered replications if there is no applicable > document between the current source sequence and the last checkpoint. > Otherwise you would be always wondering if it has been replicated entirely. That's harder. With filtered replication, we only know about sequence numbers of changes that pass the filter. > > -- Andreas > > > ________________________________ > From: Robert Newson <[email protected]> > To: [email protected]; Andreas Kemkes <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 10:40 AM > Subject: Re: Replication and checkpoints - what to expect? > > > If you're running continuous replication, then the process isn't going to > reach 100% (since that would imply all future changes have been replicated, > which is clearly impossible). I suspect it's just a reporting anomaly. I > didn't reply earlier because I hadn't had time to verify the code but since > you bumped the thread, I thought I'd best say something. > > B. > > > On 21 Jun 2012, at 17:50, Andreas Kemkes wrote: > >> Reply to [email protected] >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Andreas Kemkes <[email protected]> >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 5:36 PM >> Subject: Replication and checkpoints - what to expect? >> >> Upgrading to 1.2 on the target system allowed me to setup an unfiltered >> continuous replication between a couchdb 1.1.1 instance and a couchdb 1.2 >> and then use the latter as the source for several filtered continuous >> replications to shard a monolithic couchdb database. >> >> The unfiltered replication was started from the futon replicator api, all >> the others from the command line using the ../_replicate call. All >> replications are pull. >> >> The all work nicely, except that the replication between couchdb 1.1.1 and >> couchdb 1.2 seems to not write any checkpoints after a while: >> >> Checkpointed source sequence 911275, current source sequence 918089, >> progress 99% >> >> Is this to be expected? Would an upgrade to couchdb 1.2 on the source >> system correct the issue? >> >> >> I also think that the filtered replications, which don't involve couchdb >> 1.1.1, only checkpoint to the latest sequence that involves a document that >> passes the filter. Even if new documents are added at the source and >> replicated to the target, a new checkpoint is not always written. >> >> Is this a known issue? >> >> How can I further narrow down the issue? >> >> Any documentation on the interplay of replication and checkpoints would >> helpful as well. Thanks for your help. >> >> -- Andreas -- Filipe David Manana, "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
