Couch can and will handle net splits. If you use the replicator db. Conflicts will be detected and a winning version is determistically chosen on each node, resulting in the same doc everywhere.
Alain Mouette <[email protected]> wrote: >Em 05-11-2013 19:13, Jim Klo escreveu: >> On Nov 5, 2013, at 11:08 AM, Ryan Mohr <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Rethink caught my interest a little while back too. Looks like a >well >>> designed database and a great collection of tools to support it. >>> >>> The immediate difference that jumped out at me (and the ultimate >reason I >>> chose couch over rethink) is that rethink does not and will never >support >>> master-master replication. See this thread for some background: >>> >https://github.com/rethinkdb/rethinkdb/issues/1019#issuecomment-19573253 >>> >>> Both databases are "distributed" but in different respects. CouchDB >is >>> "distributed" in the same way git is "distributed" (eg we're all >equals). >>> RethinkDB is "distributed" in the scaling sense (sharding / >cluster-wide >>> queries) but there is always an authoritative master. >>> >> It seems to me that one could build an add-on to any database to >support this I think? I was actually wondering how difficult it would >be to build a 'generic replication api' that leverages the same CouchDB >replication protocol… Has anyone endeavored to try anything like this? > It seems like it should be straight forward. >> >> In a sense it does feel a lot like BigCouch + MongoDB… > >Yes, there is something like that for LevelDB: >https://npmjs.org/package/level-replicate >The reason that it uses LevelDB is because it is more basic, usualy the > >backgound storage and it is therefore very fast > >But I am not sure if it can recover from a Net-split which is something > >that I am not even sure if CouchDB can do stand-alone > >Alain -- Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
