On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 11:26 -0300, Claudio Saavedra wrote: > Quoting jamie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > Yes and its fairly easily fixed with tracker once I add .desktop file > > > > indexing to it > > > > > > They are already indexed in beagle, so it would be fairly easy to do > > > this with libbeagle right now, but you'd still have to mimic all the > > > tree building code with the categorizations in gmenu. > > > > > > you would not have to do that with tracker - you could just say get me > > all apps in category X or app starts with "ev*". > > > > A sql database is much faster and useful for that than a lucene based > > indexer like Beagle. > > > > Sqlite uses btrees so theres no need to maintain trees in memory when > > you use the right technology. > > > > (lucene/beagle uses hashtables and is not comparable to an btree based > > sql database. Hashtables are useless for wildcard searches whereas > > btrees are fully optimised for this as they store stuff in alphabetic > > order as opposed to being randomly distributed in a hash) > > Is this turning to yet-another-beagle-v/s-tracker discussion? Please...
no this is a "dont use an indexer as a database substitute"! the output from beagle could be put into an sqlite DB so that an in-memory tree is not needed - that would be the correct way to avoid storing everything in memory and retain speed. jamie. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list