Were the six missing documents newer on the target? That is, did you delete them on the target and expect another replication to restore them?
Sent from my iPhone > On 9 Mar 2017, at 22:08, Christopher D. Malon <[email protected]> wrote: > > I replicated a database (continuously), but ended up with fewer > documents in the target than in the source. Even if I wait, > the remaining documents don't appear. > > 1. Here's the DB entry on the source machine, showing 12 documents: > > {"db_name":"library","update_seq":"61-g1AAAAFTeJzLYWBg4MhgTmEQTM4vTc5ISXLIyU9OzMnILy7JAUoxJTIkyf___z8rkQGPoiQFIJlkD1bHjE-dA0hdPFgdIz51CSB19WB1BnjU5bEASYYGIAVUOh-_mRC1CyBq9-P3D0TtAYja-1mJbATVPoCoBbqXKQsA-0Fvaw","sizes":{"file":181716,"external":11524,"active":60098},"purge_seq":0,"other":{"data_size":11524},"doc_del_count":0,"doc_count":12,"disk_size":181716,"disk_format_version":6,"data_size":60098,"compact_running":false,"instance_start_time":"0"} > > 2. Here's the DB entry on the target machine, showing 6 documents: > > {"db_name":"library","update_seq":"6-g1AAAAFTeJzLYWBg4MhgTmEQTM4vTc5ISXLIyU9OzMnILy7JAUoxJTIkyf___z8rkQGPoiQFIJlkD1bHhE-dA0hdPFgdIz51CSB19QTV5bEASYYGIAVUOh-_GyFqF0DU7idG7QGI2vvEqH0AUQvyfxYA1_dvNA","sizes":{"file":82337,"external":2282,"active":5874},"purge_seq":0,"other":{"data_size":2282},"doc_del_count":0,"doc_count":6,"disk_size":82337,"disk_format_version":6,"data_size":5874,"compact_running":false,"instance_start_time":"0"} > > 3. Here's _active_tasks for the task, converted to YAML for readability: > > - changes_pending: 0 > checkpoint_interval: 30000 > checkpointed_source_seq: > 61-g1AAAAJTeJyd0EsOgjAQBuAqxsfSE-gRKK08VnIT7UwhSBAWyl > pvojfRm-hNsLQkbAgRNtOkk__L5M8IIcvEkmSNRYmJhDArUGRJcblmajUVBDZVVaWJJchZfSwAucPQkW > RV5jKKT3kke-KwVRP2jWBpgdMAwcOuTJ8U1tKhkSZaYhS5x2GodKylWyPZWnJ9QW3KBkr5TE1yV4_CHu > 1dMeyQ-c4o7Wm0V9u4F9setaM_GzfK2yifWplrxYeAcuGOuulrNN3X1PTFgXPqd-XSHxdwuSQ > continuous: !!perl/scalar:JSON::PP::Boolean 1 > database: shards/00000000-1fffffff/_replicator.1489086006 > doc_id: 172.16.100.222_library > doc_write_failures: 0 > docs_read: 12 > docs_written: 12 > missing_revisions_found: 12 > node: couchdb@localhost > pid: <0.5521.0> > replication_id: c60427215125bd97559d069f6fb3ddb4+continuous+create_target > revisions_checked: 12 > source: http://172.16.100.222:5984/library/ > source_seq: > 61-g1AAAAJTeJyd0EsOgjAQBuAqxsfSE-gRKK08VnIT7UwhSBAWylpvojfRm-hNsLQkbAgRNtOkk__L5M8IIcvEkmSNRYmJhDArUGRJcblmajUVBDZVVaWJJchZfSwAucPQkWRV5jKKT3kke-KwVRP2jWBpgdMAwcOuTJ8U1tKhkSZaYhS5x2GodKylWyPZWnJ9QW3KBkr5TE1yV4_CHu1dMeyQ-c4o7Wm0V9u4F9setaM_GzfK2yifWplrxYeAcuGOuulrNN3X1PTFgXPqd-XSHxdwuSQ > started_on: 1489086008 > target: http://localhost:5984/library/ > through_seq: > 61-g1AAAAJTeJyd0EsOgjAQBuAqxsfSE-gRKK08VnIT7UwhSBAWylpvojfRm-hNsLQkbAgRNtOkk__L5M8IIcvEkmSNRYmJhDArUGRJcblmajUVBDZVVaWJJchZfSwAucPQkWRV5jKKT3kke-KwVRP2jWBpgdMAwcOuTJ8U1tKhkSZaYhS5x2GodKylWyPZWnJ9QW3KBkr5TE1yV4_CHu1dMeyQ-c4o7Wm0V9u4F9setaM_GzfK2yifWplrxYeAcuGOuulrNN3X1PTFgXPqd-XSHxdwuSQ > type: replication > updated_on: 1489096815 > user: peer > > 4. Here's the _replicator record for the task: > > {"_id":"172.16.100.222_library","_rev":"2-8e6cf63bc167c7c7e4bd38242218572c","schema":1,"storejson":null,"source":"http://172.16.100.222:5984/library","target":"http://localhost:5984/library","create_target":true,"dont_storejson":1,"wholejson":{},"user_ctx":{"roles":["_admin"],"name":"peer"},"continuous":true,"owner":null,"_replication_state":"triggered","_replication_state_time":"2017-03-09T19:00:08+00:00","_replication_id":"c60427215125bd97559d069f6fb3ddb4"} > > There should have been no conflicting transactions on the target host. > The appearance of "61-*" in through_seq of the _active_tasks entry > gives me a false sense of security; I only noticed the missing documents > by chance. > > A fresh replication to a different target succeeded without any > missing documents. > > Is there anything here that would tip me off that the target wasn't > in sync with the source? Is there a good way to resolve the condition? > > Thanks, > Christopher
