Greetings all, This may sound like heresy, but should we back-port all of the useful features of ht://Dig 3.2 into 3.1 and give up on the 3.2 branch? Joe showed a factor of 4 speed difference, and today I was getting a factor of over 10 difference (after much tweaking of the 3.2 code).
I'm not sure who wrote the new database code, but they seem to have left the team and no-one seems to be jumping up to pick up the pieces. I certainly don't have the knowledge, or the time to learn. For a while, Neal seemed to have the interest and skill needed for rewriting the code, but he seems to have found greener pastures too. (Are you still with us, Neal?) Does anyone know what new features require the new database structure? Phrase searching is the big one, and compression is the other one which will take a lot of work. There's also the ability to set weights at query time rather than dig time, but that is presumably just a matter of replacing a "weight" field with a "flags" field and keeping the rest of the database structure unchanged. In addition, 3.1.6 builds much faster, and doesn't use automake (which I would like -- those tools seem a nightmare). My vote is that we release 3.2.0b6 basically as the code stands now, and then start 3.3.0a1 by back-porting features to 3.1.6. For each, we'll measure the impact on performance, and decide which ones are worth it. Thoughts? Lachlan -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ht://Dig developer DownUnder (http://www.htdig.org) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click _______________________________________________ ht://Dig Developer mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List information (subscribe/unsubscribe, etc.) https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev
