On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Ville M. Vainio <vivai...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.o...@intel.com> wrote: > >> I've said before and I say it again here, I consider performance >> comparisons pointless at this time. > > Considering that e-d-s has a much more modest feature set than tracker > (tracker in general being a much more ambitious project), I would have > expected it to to trounce tracker in performance, which doesn't seem > to be the case.
I am wondering if EDS was tested using flat file storage ? (sorry for my ignorance in reading the test code and setup) > > This evidence might prompt to re-evaluate this part of the > architectural plans. Or at least leave the door open to transitioning > back to tracker when it's feasible. Isn't this the situation already? I remember Arjan saying "this round". I at least hope that what we are aiming for is to first release something out the door already, usable to some degree, and then refactor/ improve when technologies get more baked and their interfaces. -Sivan _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list MeeGo-dev@meego.com http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
