looks good
minor detail - Live handler needs to return FALSE!
jamie
On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 17:49 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> Newer version
>
> On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 15:15 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> > To Jamie, Martyn, Frade, Ottela, etc ...
> >
> > Here's some actual code. Please re
Newer version
On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 15:15 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> To Jamie, Martyn, Frade, Ottela, etc ...
>
> Here's some actual code. Please review this and let me know if you see
> dings different.
>
> On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 17:56 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> > Pre note:
> >
> >
T o Jamie, Martyn, Frade, Otella, etc ...
Here's some actual code. Please review this and let me know if you see
dings different.
On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 17:56 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> Pre note:
>
> This is about the Xesam support being done (since this week) in the
> indexer-split.
>
> A
On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 17:14 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 11:05 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
>
> > > The best mechanism is simply reusing the same mechanism that was used
> > > initially. And that is the query that we converted from the Xesam XML
> > > stuff into the SQL
On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 17:14 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 11:05 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
> This way, a live-query doesn't consume memory in that temporary table
> when it's just sitting there, doing nothing (and no indexing is
> happening, in which case the indexer ca
On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 11:05 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
> > The best mechanism is simply reusing the same mechanism that was used
> > initially. And that is the query that we converted from the Xesam XML
> > stuff into the SQL query used to get the GetHits/GetHitsData and fed to
> > us during t
On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 16:25 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 10:06 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
> > Im still a little confused by this
> >
> > due to the indexer split, the non-indexer daemon knows when a file has
> > changed already (via inotify) but the code you changed is
On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 10:06 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
> Im still a little confused by this
>
> due to the indexer split, the non-indexer daemon knows when a file has
> changed already (via inotify) but the code you changed is part of the
> indexer
That's correct. We can use this to know whet
Im still a little confused by this
due to the indexer split, the non-indexer daemon knows when a file has
changed already (via inotify) but the code you changed is part of the
indexer
I would have thought having a GSList in the non-indexer daemon would
suffice (the list would store an Info struc
On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 15:39 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> + // Comment by Philip Van Hoof:
> + // Please verify that str_service_type_id must be the first argument.
> + // Reading the file sqlite-stored-procs.sql this doesn't seem to be
> + // true
Never mind that commen
FYI,
The diff contains a first look at the tracker-db-sqlite.c file, I added
some comments that illustrate how a journal table "Events" will be
filled up.
Note that the table will most likely become a sqlite memory table.
The reason why I don't think a GHashTable in the C code is as good is
beca
Pre note:
This is about the Xesam support being done (since this week) in the
indexer-split.
About:
Xesam requires notifying live searches about changes that affect them.
We plan to implement this with a "events" table that journals all
creates, deletes and updates that the indexer causes.
Per
12 matches
Mail list logo
