Are you updating one doc over and over? That's my inference. Also you'll need to run compaction on all shards then look at the distribution afterward.
Sent from my iPhone > On 22 Jul 2016, at 21:02, Peyton Vaughn <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I've been working through getting a Couch cluster set up in Kubernetes. > Finally got to the point of testing it and am a bit surprised by the > distribution of data I see amongst the shards (this is for 2 nodes on 2 > separate host): > > node1: > ~>du -hs * > > 6.7G shards/00000000-1fffffff > 855M shards/20000000-3fffffff > 859M shards/40000000-5fffffff > 856M shards/60000000-7fffffff > 859M shards/80000000-9fffffff > 858M shards/a0000000-bfffffff > 6.5G shards/c0000000-dfffffff > 851M shards/e0000000-ffffffff > > node2: > ~>du -hs * > 853M 00000000-1fffffff > 855M 20000000-3fffffff > 859M 40000000-5fffffff > 856M 60000000-7fffffff > 859M 80000000-9fffffff > 858M a0000000-bfffffff > 853M c0000000-dfffffff > 851M e0000000-ffffffff > > Two of the shards really stand out in terms of disk usage... so I was > wondering if this is expected behavior, or have I managed to misconfigure > something? > > > I really appreciate any insight - am really trying to understand 2.0 as > best I can. > Thanks! > Peyton
