Jamie McCracken wrote: > On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 10:55 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote: >> Have you had time to look at the rest of the branch to see if it is >> satisfactory? >> > unfortunately it is not > > Running it I get very poor performance (Im running tracker-applet so > dont know if that is affecting/pausing it)
Can you elaborate? What is poor performance? The Crawling? The indexing? The searching? > Does not handle file moves (see trunk for this as its non trivial) Let me come back to you on that one. > The gio file monitoring is not adequate - inotify needs optimisation Why? > EG for inotify we only trigger a change if FILE_WRITE_CLOSED is sent - > that way we know the file has finished changing and we can safely index. > Currently it indexes whenever the file changes which sucks. That's not true. We tell the indexer to re-index if we get updates on the file. But if we get updates more than 5 times, the file becomes black listed and we wait until we have had 30 seconds of inactivity on the file before emitting the event up the stack to re-index the file. Also inotify already has throttling built in so we don't get spammed with events. There is already a short delay before we get the event. We could JUST use G_FILE_MONITOR_EVENT_CHANGES_DONE_HINT event which is there to suggest it is the last change on a file. > FAM would > need a pending list (as per trunk) as it only has the file change and we > need to wait til changes are stabilised before trigger an index Again, we have this built in right now. We can improve it of course the way I suggest above. > Also we are a differential index so i dont understand why you have > removed the differential update code? What does it do when a file > updates? Not sure what you mean here? -- Regards, Martyn _______________________________________________ tracker-list mailing list tracker-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/tracker-list
