On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
I think it's worth trying, but not sure if worth merging and
deploying. 0.82 didn't used directly the python xapian bindings, but
some wrapper on top of it that tried to make easier the mapping
between keys in the B-tree
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
The mapping mentioned before is persisted in index/config inside the DS dir.
Ah, it's not static? The number-field mapping It seems stable to me
testing it. So the right way is to read that 'config', how do you
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 17:48, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
I think it's worth trying, but not sure if worth merging and
deploying. 0.82 didn't used directly the python xapian bindings, but
some
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 17:48, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Yeah. It's a very complex beast that, after following the callstack
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 20:21, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 17:48, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Tomeu Vizoso
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 12:49, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
I am trying to add minimal support on 0.84 for the old 0.82 format
in which JE metadata was saved on external disks.
By minimal I mean read-only, fail-safe, and generally with small
impact on the codebase. I sure
