But if replication only copies the leaf then it makes sense that it is fatser, at least on the same machine. Instead of balancing a tree it just copies a single revision. Also I undestand from Jason that compaction tries to catch up, unlike a non continuos replication. So it seems that if I don't need old revisions the fastest thing is to replicate and switchover to the replicated database. I wonder if I can tune the replication to do copy more revisions besides the leaf. בתאריך 31 בינו' 2014 21:57, "Jens Alfke" <[email protected]> כתב:
> > On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Boaz Citrin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > @Jason - the purpose is that compaction will not catch up with heavy > > write rate and will affect performance. > > The same will be true of replication. > > > I wonder if I can omit the compaction if replication gives the same > result. > > Will replication remove old revisions too? > > Yes, the replicator only transfers leaf revisions. > > —Jens
