On 4 October 2012 17:04, Steve Koppelman <[email protected]> wrote: > Assuming a hubless (i.e. not master-slave) set of 4 couchdb 1.2.0 > servers behind a load balancer, is there a recommended best-practice > for setting up the replication relationships? I'm most interested in: > > * Assuming the _replicator document is on one of the two nodes in a > relationship, is there a preference for push vs. pull replication > relationships? I seem to recall pull as being regarded as more > reliable than push through 1.1.1.
Hope somebody else comments on this, I'm interested to know if this still makes a difference. > * The new docs highlight replication of the _replicator database as a > way to establish many-to-many replication. This raises two questions. > > 1. Is there harm in this sort of cluster to have all members to pull > from one another, i.e., all of > A->B > A->C > B->A > B->C > C ->A Multimaster Meshed Magic :-) > 2. Is there harm in full replication of _replicator if it results in > documents that point a node to itself? That is, if I have a document > that specifies a source of "localhost" and a destination as "node B", > if this is replicated to node B this particular instance of the > _replicator doc would set up an instance to replicate to itself, which > doesn't sound good. Is it important to do filtered replication of > _replicator when taking this approach? Should be fine. > Rgds, etc. > > -sk You might want to look at BigCouch which handles a lot of this sort of stuff for you, as well as sharded views. But the feature set isn't quite parity yet. A+ Dave
