On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 03:37:44PM -0700, Brock Pytlik wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 06:15:02PM -0400, Dave Miner wrote:
>>   
>>> "pkg install" and uninstall already have --no-index.  We need to   
>>> instruct people to use it when installing things on the CD 
>>> environment,  of course.
>>>     
>>
>> Perhaps I'm out of the loop already, but I thought we discussed a
>> solution to this problem at yesterday's pkg iteam meeting.
>>
>> The consensus that I thought we reached was that local search indices
>> won't be built by default.  When the user performs a local search, we'll
>> print a message stating that local search performance is degraded.  If
>> better performance is desired, the user can create a local search index
>> by invoking the proper command.  Once local indices exist, pkg(5) will
>> continue to update them.
>>
>> In this case, users wouldn't need the --no-index option, since the
>> default behavior doesn't create a local index.  The only catch is that
>> the folks who create the install CD must make sure that no local index
>> is present on the disc, otherwise pkg will try to rebuild it.
>>
>>   
> This is the new (as of yesterday), hoped for behavior. I'm still working  
> on getting that implemented (and hitting some interesting behavior along  
> the way). One modification I made to the proposal was that if an image  
> is empty and is being installed into for the first time (think a newly  
> created user image), then we do build the index. So, the behavior I'm  
> currently looking at implementing is:
> 1) If the index exists, update it.
> 2) If the index doesn't exist and no packages are present in the image,  
> set up the empty index then update it. (This is fast)
> 3) If the index doesn't exist but the image has packages, don't index.
>
> This indexing behavior will also be present in PackageManager.
>
> I think this addresses the issues for installing and searching for  
> PackageManager and the cli. Please let me know if I've overlooked 
> something.

Just a couple further thoughts on your proposal.

It may be advantageous to provide a command-line or API option to remove an
existing index.  (I don't know what interface the installer is using.)
At least this way, there won't be a corresponding installer change
required if you later change the format / on-disk layout of the local
index.

Case #2 is fast, but how much overhead does #1 add as the user performs
small operations.  IIRC, you modified local search to journal its
updates, right? 

-j

_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to