I guess it's viable - adding a table is extra overhead, just like a delta column is overhead, so it's much of a muchness. I've not had others request this though, so I'm not sure if I'd merge it in. Perhaps it's worth having a look at Dan Pickett's Workling Delta code, and build your own approach in the same manner, making it easy for others to use.
http://github.com/dpickett/workling_delta_indexer/tree/master Cheers -- Pat On 09/06/2009, at 10:27 AM, Alex wrote: > > I don't want to add a delta column to my table. Why not use the > update_at column and keep track of the last scan for updated records, > instead of doing the "interval method" that risks missing records and > reindexing records? > > I.e. create a table with one cell with the last index date and index > records updated since then. That seems a lot more reliable and > efficient than the other non-delta column methods. > > Any reason not to add this a delta method? > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thinking Sphinx" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/thinking-sphinx?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
