On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Dale Harvey <[email protected]> wrote: > Does anyone have a compelling reason for this optimisation existing?
I believe Robert Newson does (: > I cant think of many reasons for a user to be sending the same writes to > different servers then not wanting them to conflict, I feel like its an > anti pattern and I feel like if I make seperate writes and they dont > conflict when I replicate, something is broken. Considering where there are > a lot of huge and fairly easy wins in replication, spending any time on > this almost never touched case doesnt seem worth it. > > PouchDB just uses random revs, the only people that have cared have known > the inner working of couchdb, a pouchdb user has never been confused by the > behaviour as far as I can remember. The answer is in the word: "reproducibility" or consistency of your actions. You'll probably find awkward if repeating exactly the same actions in the same order would give you different results, right? And since the result is different, replication would considered it as conflict, while there is no of any. -- ,,,^..^,,,
