Re: [Zeitgeist] [Merge] lp:~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting into lp:zeitgeist
So, how about now? -- https://code.launchpad.net/~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting/+merge/96479 Your team Zeitgeist Framework Team is requested to review the proposed merge of lp:~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting into lp:zeitgeist. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist Post to : zeitgeist@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Zeitgeist] [Merge] lp:~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting into lp:zeitgeist
I wouldn't really like to change the semantics of the Search() method, somehow magically it approximates the results quite ok (plus it'd be weird if _SUBJECTS groupings worked perfectly and the others just ok-ish). -- https://code.launchpad.net/~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting/+merge/96479 Your team Zeitgeist Framework Team is subscribed to branch lp:zeitgeist. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist Post to : zeitgeist@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Zeitgeist] [Merge] lp:~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting into lp:zeitgeist
I'm starting to think that doing the secondary sorting in FTS isn't a good idea, we're sending the relevancies to the client, so we should keep the full Zeitgeist sorting, and since the client has the relevancies, it can do this kind of sort itself (or not). -- https://code.launchpad.net/~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting/+merge/96479 Your team Zeitgeist Framework Team is requested to review the proposed merge of lp:~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting into lp:zeitgeist. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist Post to : zeitgeist@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Zeitgeist] [Merge] lp:~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting into lp:zeitgeist
As discussed on IRC, I don't really like how this is ending up. We should look
into re-architecting FTS at some point, starting from the assumption that it's
only for searching current documents (so it may change from storing all events
to storing one of each subjects + event information, or whatever). But since
this stuff is supposed to be working in Precise, I guess it's fine to go with
the workaround for now.
The main problem I see with the MP right now is that it's just looking at the
URI when re-requesting the events, so if the request was for something
particular (especially event interpretation, event manifestation or actor,
since the subject data could be seen as somewhat more constant) it's likely to
end up giving a wrong sort of event.
A possible way of fixing this would be merging the uri templates with the
request templates (the ones used in CompileEventFilterQuery). The trivial
implementation would go something like:
tmpls = []
for template in templates:
for uri in uris:
tmpl = copy(template)
tmpl.subject_uri = ...
tmpls.append(tmpl)
However, it may end up generating really big SQL queries (eg. consider just two
templates for subject_interpretation={Music,Video} and a limit of 100 events;
that becomes 200 templates with subject_interpretation and
subject_manifestation, which is 400 conditions in the generated SQL).
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting/+merge/96479
Your team Zeitgeist Framework Team is requested to review the proposed merge of
lp:~mhr3/zeitgeist/fts-secondary-sorting into lp:zeitgeist.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist
Post to : zeitgeist@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
