Am Montag, 10. Februar 2014, 12:17:13 schrieb Pascal Obry: > I have now integrated this as agreed. > > While testing/reviewing the code I found that the tagxtag table could > loose synchronization. > For example the routine dt_tag_detach_by_string() removes the tag > without modifying the tagxtag table. > > In many ways my tagxtag table was messed-up. I have then run this script: > > (sql) update tagxtag set count=(select count(*) from tagged_images > where tagid=id2 and imgid in (select imgid from tagged_images where > tagid=id1)); > (sql) update tagxtag set count=count+1000000 where id1=id2; > > After 1 hour my tagxtag was looking lot better. > > Do we want to document this somehow? > > A script in "tools/clean-tagxtag.sh" > > What do you think?
Maybe we should ask a different question first: Do we want to keep the tagxtag table? People have complained about the tag ordering a few times, and that table is only used to make educated guesses to propose tags that are more likely to be assigned. If no one uses and/or likes that feature we could as well drop it and get rid of all that code. Tobias
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls. Read the Whitepaper. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________ darktable-devel mailing list darktable-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-devel
