Hacktoberfest 2026: le issue che i maintainer hanno segnato per ottobre, aperte e adatte ai principianti. Sfoglia le issue Hacktoberfest

[Bug]: Replication result depends on whether the target has a validate_doc_update function

Aperta
  • Qualcosa non va?
#6,162 5 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno

@nickva ci sta già lavorando.

Dal 15/10/2026.

  • #6168 di @nickva — aperta

Valutazione

Difficoltà
4/5
Tempo stimato
3-5 giorni
Idoneità per principianti
44/100
Tipo di issue
Bug
Chiarezza
Abbastanza chiara
Stato di attività
Attiva
Stack tecnologico
erlang, javascript
Ambito
database, databases, distributed-systems

Direzione di ricerca

Start with couch_db:before_docs_update and prep_and_validate_replicated_updates, then trace how couch_replicator_worker:find_missing handles the missing ratio. Run the provided curl and jq reproduction against CouchDB 3.5.3 and compare the final document in t1 and t2. Done means both targets reach the same document state with and without the accepting validate_doc_update design doc.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

Version

3.5.3

Describe the problem you're encountering

Two target databases that get the same replications, in the same order, from the same sources can end up with a different state for a document: one ends deleted, the other ends live with an old revision as the winner. The only difference between the targets is a design doc whose validate_doc_update accepts everything.

It shows up when a target first receives a revision with a short history (from a replica with a low revs_limit) and later receives the same revision again with its full history.

Expected Behaviour

I would expect replication to give the same result whether or not the target has a validate_doc_update function that accepts the document.

Steps to Reproduce

Needs curl and jq. Single node, one-shot _replicate, run in order.

COUCH=http://adm:[email protected]:5984
J='Content-Type: application/json'

for db in a c b d t1 t2; do curl -sS -X PUT "$COUCH/$db" > /dev/null; done
curl -sS -X PUT "$COUCH/b/_revs_limit" -d 1 > /dev/null
curl -sS -X PUT "$COUCH/d/_revs_limit" -d 2 > /dev/null
curl -sS -X PUT "$COUCH/t2/_design/accept" -H "$J" \
  -d '{"validate_doc_update":"function(newDoc, oldDoc, userCtx, secObj) {}"}' > /dev/null

rep() { curl -sS -X POST "$COUCH/_replicate" -H "$J" \
  -d "{\"source\":\"$COUCH/$1\",\"target\":\"$COUCH/$2\"${3:+,$3}}" > /dev/null; }
ONLY_X='"doc_ids":["X"]'

# create X (1-a) on a, replicate to c
REV=$(curl -sS -X PUT "$COUCH/a/X" -H "$J" -d '{"v":"a"}' | jq -r .rev)
rep a c "$ONLY_X"

# 6 unrelated docs on a
curl -sS -X POST "$COUCH/a/_bulk_docs" -H "$J" -d '{"docs":[
  {"_id":"f1"},{"_id":"f2"},{"_id":"f3"},{"_id":"f4"},{"_id":"f5"},{"_id":"f6"}]}' > /dev/null

# edit X (2-b) on a, replicate to b (revs_limit 1, so b keeps 2-b with no ancestors)
REV=$(curl -sS -X PUT "$COUCH/a/X" -H "$J" -d "{\"_rev\":\"$REV\",\"v\":\"b\"}" | jq -r .rev)
rep a b "$ONLY_X"

# both targets: c then b, giving two separate roots 1-a and 2-b
for t in t1 t2; do rep c $t; rep b $t; done

# both targets: replicate a with one worker, batch size 1
for t in t1 t2; do rep a $t '"worker_processes":1,"worker_batch_size":1'; done

# delete X (3-d) on a, replicate to d (revs_limit 2), then d to both targets
curl -sS -X DELETE "$COUCH/a/X?rev=$REV" > /dev/null
rep a d "$ONLY_X"
for t in t1 t2; do rep d $t; done

curl -sS "$COUCH/t1/X"
curl -sS "$COUCH/t2/X"

Output on 3.5.3:

{"error":"not_found","reason":"deleted"}
{"_id":"X","_rev":"1-cd6dcd82d939d5b6220025fbc573b36a","v":"a"}
Your Environment

CouchDB 3.5.3 (git 7a1f97558), Erlang/OTP 28, single node, q=1 n=1, macOS arm64.

Additional Context

From reading the source, I think two things interact:

  • couch_db:before_docs_update only runs prep_and_validate_replicated_updates when the db has a VDU (or a design doc or attachments in the request). That step drops a replicated revision that is already a leaf; without a VDU the same path gets merged.
  • couch_replicator_worker:find_missing skips _revs_diff once the missing ratio average goes over 0.95 (6 batches in a row where everything was missing), and then re-sends revisions the target already has, with the longer history.

The same split happens with default replication settings when 20,000 unrelated docs come before X in a's changes. If the unrelated docs come after X, or there are only 5, both targets end the same. The relevant files look unchanged on main.

Fuller repro with all runs and controls: https://github.com/blackwell-systems/normalization-confluence/tree/main/research/couchdb-replicator

Lingua principale
Erlang
Stelle
7k
Fork
1.1k
Merge medio
10h 16m
PR unite (30g)
35

Preparare l'ambiente

Apri in Codespaces

Avvia il container di sviluppo del progetto nel browser, con il tuo account GitHub.

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di apache/couchdb

Tutte le issue di apache/couchdb

Issue simili

Altre issue su Databases

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.