On Sun, 2009-04-05 at 08:39 +0300, Boaz Rymland wrote:
> Omer Zak wrote:
>
> > The huge files (index and log files) were not a problem for me. I set
> > aside a separate multi-GB partition for Beagle's use, directing it to
> > use it by an appropriately planted symbolic link.
> >
> Even if I had lots of diskspace I still wouldn't have liked the fact
> that beagle waste so much of it and more over, the fact that I need to
> track its disk usage. But, its a matter of taste of course.
> > I use those "traditional" command line tools, too.
I do not understand why would anyone need to track Beagle's disk usage
nowadays, when 500GB hard disks cost only the equivalent of few work
hours.
It is also information which does not need to be backed up.
There is a tradeoff between index size and ease of locating information.
I wonder whether there are studies about the smallest index size which
still facilitates fast information retrieval according to arbitrary
criteria.
> > The problem is that they are very slow when I want to search significant
> > parts of my PC's filesystem. Therefore I need a search tool which I
> > would expect to index the information for easier subsequent retrieval.
> >
> Right, searching over large subtrees of your FS can be quite slow. There
> are probably even more downsides to command line tools. Well, nobody's
> perfect :-)
Those command line tools usually do not work from an index (an exception
is 'locate').
--- Omer
--
42 is the answer to everything. Food is the answer to everything except
obesity.
My own blog is at http://www.zak.co.il/tddpirate/
My opinions, as expressed in this E-mail message, are mine alone.
They do not represent the official policy of any organization with which
I may be affiliated in any way.
WARNING TO SPAMMERS: at http://www.zak.co.il/spamwarning.html
_______________________________________________
Linux-il mailing list
Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il
http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
