Karsten Hilbert wrote: > >> (otherwise the query may get slow checking against >> blobs.reviewed_doc_objs for every new document. >> > Not that I should think :-) If there's no row in > blobs.reviewed_doc_objs then there's no review. > Ok, you can do select * from doc_obj where fk_intended_reviewer = <me> and not found (select 1 from reviewed_doc_obj where fk_doc_obj = doc_obj.id)
to display an 'Inbox' of unread blobs. However after a few years the number of doc_objs the user has ever seen, which then have to be run through the sub-query, gets very large. Having said that, I'm very impressed with the performance of the 0.3 client, I'm been using the same hardware since 2002. (P4 1.6 512M RAM) > In fact, I was just about to suggest that: > > Convert the PIT into a proper UTF8 file. Store that in > blobs.doc_obj.data. Store it as properly encoded text in > blobs.doc_desc as well. Link doc_desc to the appropriate > doc_med. The doc_obj content is authoritative (because > doc_desc can always be regenerated from it). > > So we get the best of both worlds. Proper blobs handling and > searchability of text. > *Two* copies? Sigh. Disc is cheap, I suppose. Ian _______________________________________________ Gnumed-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnumed-devel
