On 15 Aug 2009, at 19:02, Jason Davies wrote:
On 6 Aug 2009, at 21:01, Brian Candler wrote:
On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 05:04:34PM +0100, Jason Davies wrote:
The other good thing about storing historical
versions as attachments is that they would get replicated.
Currently we
don't replicate old MVCC versions, this would have to change as
well as
preventing them from being compacted as you say.
However, we do replicate old MVCC versions if they are conflicting,
and we
do keep them through compaction.
Perhaps "conflicting" and "historical" could be treated in roughly
the same
way?
You resolve conflicts by deleting the conflicting rev(s). This
could be done
for deleting historical versions too.
Do we want deletions of historical versions to be replicated too?
For example, if I "permanently delete" a bunch of old versions on my
local machine, and then replicate to my master server, should the
master server also delete these old versions? This would be
analagous to deleting conflicting revs. I can see that in some
cases this may not be desired e.g. if someone is simply trying to
free up space, and they would prefer the master server to preserve
all revisions.
Is it possible to write a validate_doc_update function that would deny
historical revision deletes from replicating? If yes, I'd say that's
the answer for a server that is designated to keep all revisions.
Cheers
Jan
--
