I see the data management is totally different(and better). now there is a _dbs.couch for a registry-like database for databases and actual databases are located in data/shards subdirectories.
so.. only replication works here.. and one can replicate many databases in parallel. another difference I see is the size of databases. 2.0 version keep a very small size of databases compared to 1.6.1 version. Is there any change in storage engine that makes so big differences in database sizes? all records in db1 in 1.6.1 have only one revision like (1-...) format db1 in 1.6.1 is 2.5GB with 362849 records after replication: db1 in 2.0 has 69.3 MB with 362849 records when is recommended to use design documents and when mango queries. is mango intended to replace design documents although I assume both build a view tree for the query in question. which one is faster? what are the use-cases for each one of the query methods? Thanks, Bogdan On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:20 AM, max <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Install 2.0 version on another server or just make it listen on different > port than 1.6 then replicate your data ;) > > 2016-10-07 9:49 GMT+02:00 Bogdan Andu <[email protected]>: > > > Hello, > > > > I configured a single-node CouchDB 2.0 instance and > > I copied in data directory 1.6.1 couch databases. > > > > But the databases does not show up in Fauxton, only the > > test databases: > > > > ["_global_changes","_replicator","_users","verifytestdb"]. > > > > Is there a way to make CouchDB 2.0 read 1.6.1 couch files > > > > without importing? > > > > /Bogdan > > >
