https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=404057
--- Comment #34 from Martin Steigerwald <mar...@lichtvoll.de> --- I would not worry all that much about redoing the database for a format change. In the end what we have now that it re-indexes anyway. And yes, I have a multi device BTRFS. Actually a BTRFS RAID 1. I wonder whether Baloo would be better off by using filesystem UUID together with 64 bit inode number as an identifier. However using a complete filesystem UUID may need too much storage, I don't know. Another idea would be to mark each indexed file with an kind of ID or timestap using extended attributes. However, that might get lost as well and it won't work on filesystems not supporting those. A third idea would be to write an 32 bit identifier as a filesystem ID into a hidden file below the root directory of the filesystem or a hidden sub directory of it. This would at least avoid using an identifier that could change. It would not solve the 32 bit for inode number not enough for storing a 64 bit inode number issue. However this might be a change that might be easiest to apply short term. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
