Github user rnewson commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-107393470
+1 after variable name changed for consistency.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user rnewson commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#discussion_r31414907
--- Diff: src/couch_db.erl ---
@@ -332,8 +332,13 @@ get_db_info(Db) -
{ok, FileSize} = couch_file:bytes(Fd),
{ok, DbReduction} =
Github user hdiedrich commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-106894044
I was wondering where it is being assigned to the `reduce` field, found it
here, thanks!
Github user hdiedrich commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-106030561
I mean the `#btree`'s `reduce` field that is used in `couch_btree.erl`
```Erlang
full_reduce(#btree{root=nil,reduce=Reduce}) -
{ok, Reduce(reduce,
Github user eiri commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-106033350
@hdiedrich Yes I understand the question and link in my previous answer is
pointing to the code point. It's populated on `couch_db_updater` init and
GitHub user eiri opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54
Fix `active_size` format conversion in `get_db_info` function
In `active_size` conversion in `couch_db:get_db_info/1` old db reduction's
size format assumed to be an integer representing active
Github user kxepal commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-105521023
How it's possible to reproduce such case? Never saw any problem with sizes
for db info.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user eiri commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-105523469
@kxepal I can reproduce it by migrating a test database from DBCore to
CouchDB 2.0, but I doubt it could be shown in migration from CouchDB 1.6.x to
2.0, as far as I
Github user kxepal commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-105524431
@eiri by migrate you mean simple copy-paste db file from 1.x to 2.0
database directory? And what's the different between DBCore and CouchDB 1.x?
---
If your
Github user eiri commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-105577336
@hdiedrich : in
[couch_db_updater.erl](https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/blob/master/src/couch_db_updater.erl#L492)
It's the same in DBCore's
Github user hdiedrich commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-105563754
I was asking for where reduce = is populated for checking how the tuple
gets into that place.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user eiri commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb-couch/pull/54#issuecomment-105529725
@kxepal I don't think simple copy would do, given the database file going
to be named as a shard. I thought of something like creating test db for 1.x,
creating
12 matches
Mail list logo
