Of course, you can also use Do to launch WoW.

--Tobias


On Nov 3, 3:53 pm, MaxMC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it just me or does Do now do the work of Beagle and Tracker as
> well?
>
> /Mårten
>
> On Nov 1, 8:20 pm, Tobias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Thanks for taking it seriously. It's not that big a problem, but I
> > thought there might be a bug.
>
> > In general, I really appreciate Do's ability to find stuff quick, and
> > not only the thirty files I'm regularly working on. So the ability to
> > maintain a big universe is, in my eyes, desirable. It's also difficult
> > to tell for me at which indexing depth the thing loses traction and
> > just produces load. It's all thoroughly nested. Of course, many of the
> > actual items in my index are just numbered series of files. An option
> > to explicitly *exclude* certain paths would be nice to have. Or an
> > option to just index folder names in certain paths, and not the files
> > themselves.
>
> > Use case: Somewhere in the depths of my photo collection, there's a
> > directory that contains all the images I've snapped at one event. All
> > my images are imported into folders whose names reflect the date of
> > production, and the images themselves have the numbered filename the
> > camera has given them. Currently, I can quickly navigate to the images
> > of the event by just entering the date in Do, which is really nifty,
> > but the filenames themselves are not good for anything.
>
> > --Tobias
>
> > On Oct 31, 4:04 pm, Jason Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Whoa!  Ok I know what is causing this...  We will have to rethink how we
> > > handle updating child items.  We probably need to defer this to a really
> > > low priority that updates MUCH less frequently than universe.  I will
> > > work on that today.
>
> > > I imagine the best thing to do would be to do incremental updates to it,
> > > and then every 2 or 3 hours of running, completely clear its cache and
> > > start over.  That would provide the CPU spike on you every 2 or 3 hours
> > > instead of every couple minutes while not being a memory leak.  It would
> > > however grow its memory slightly more for that 2 or 3 hours period.
>
> > > DBO
>
> > > On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 23:21 -0700, Tobias wrote:
> > > > Well, those must be all the contents of my Documents directory, and Do
> > > > does an excellent job locating stuff inside. Many of them are pictures
> > > > and audio files and most files aren't moved around a lot. There's
> > > > certainly no point in indexing them every couple of minutes, much less
> > > > full throttle. But that's not the point. Rather, I didn't ever have
> > > > this behavior. It just came up a couple of days or weeks ago. It's
> > > > like there's something hanging for a while and then giving up with an
> > > > error. So I thought there might be something that's not working right.
>
> > > > --Tobias
>
> > > > On Oct 30, 12:31 am, "Alex Launi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > How many files are you indexing? I think that giant universe size is 
> > > > > the
> > > > > problem. Are any of those folders really populated?
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > --Alex Launi
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"GNOME Do" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/gnome-do?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to