Removing Replicate status

DEVONthink
1

I ought to know this but I don’t. Nor do I want to risk experimenting.

The more I use DT 3, the more I marvel at its functionality.

I enjoy making that most of DT so that I’ve almost (though not quite: I’d never do that :slight_smile: ) begun to go through my meticulously :slight_smile: named and ordered Group structure to take advantage of Replication.

When I can see - not so much that I want to ‘cover all bases’ by putting records/files/data in two places just because I can - but genuinely believe that a Group (and its documents) should rightfully be accessible in two places, I successfully Replicate it.

But I can’t see a way to unset the Replicate status when I realise that I’ve made a mistake for some reason… do I just delete the second (‘target’) items? Or is there a way to mark the first (‘source’) Group(s)/files/docs as having a Replicate to… destination as nowhere/null/clear, please?

TIA!

1 Like
2

Deleting the replicants will “unset the replicant status”

In deleting, I wouldn’t want to delete the original
but I’m unsure how to distinguish the original from the replicants; they all have a replicant icon

1 Like
3

Thanks.

So I can safely simply navigate to the Group (in)to which DT conceptually copied the Groups/docs (the ‘target’, so to speak) - and move them to the Trash?

I’m OK with that, thanks, because where I Replicated the ‘originals’ from is fresh in my mind :slight_smile: .

4

There’s no such thing like an original, all replicants reference exactly the same item internally. Therefore it’s only important not to delete all replicants, one has to remain.

3 Likes
5

And nowadays, when you look at the contents of trash, you can see whether a copy remains or not: those items crossed through will be deleted permanently, those not crossed through have a copy somewhere in the database (which will not be removed on deleting).

3 Likes
6

Thanks again, @cgrunenberg, @Blanc!

So - following your directive not to think in terms of ‘originals’ - would it be safe to delete only the second file; that is, the file which (after Replication) can be seen in the place TO which I replicated the first file?

7

That’s right.

What you could do is set up a text database and just play with that. That’s what I do - the database is full of pointless files which I can lose without pain. That way I can test rules and functions and see what happens :slight_smile:

1 Like
8

Thanks, @Blanc.

I like pointless files :slight_smile:

In fact (I’ve been a DT addict for only six months) so well designed is everything about it that I’ve had to do much less dummy testing like that than is usual with such complex software.

1 Like