On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 14:32 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Jamie McCracken wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 10:55 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
> >> Have you had time to look at the rest of the branch to see if it is
> >> satisfactory?
> >>
> > unfortunately it is not
> >
> > Running it I get very poor performance (Im running tracker-applet so
> > dont know if that is affecting/pausing it)
>
> Can you elaborate? What is poor performance? The Crawling? The indexing?
> The searching?
>
> > Does not handle file moves (see trunk for this as its non trivial)
>
> Let me come back to you on that one.
>
> > The gio file monitoring is not adequate - inotify needs optimisation
>
> Why?
>
> > EG for inotify we only trigger a change if FILE_WRITE_CLOSED is sent -
> > that way we know the file has finished changing and we can safely index.
> > Currently it indexes whenever the file changes which sucks.
>
> That's not true.
>
> We tell the indexer to re-index if we get updates on the file. But if we
> get updates more than 5 times, the file becomes black listed and we wait
> until we have had 30 seconds of inactivity on the file before emitting
> the event up the stack to re-index the file.
this facility is for broken apps like bit torrent as well as stuff that
frequently changes - its not to be confused with stuff like a file
download which would cause 5 reindexes and a blacklist unnecessarily
which is unacceptable
Beagle uses FILE_WRITE_CLOSED along with tracker to prevent this so it
is necessary
>
> Also inotify already has throttling built in so we don't get spammed
> with events. There is already a short delay before we get the event.
>
> We could JUST use G_FILE_MONITOR_EVENT_CHANGES_DONE_HINT event which is
> there to suggest it is the last change on a file.
If the inotify backend uses FILE_WRITE_CLOSED for that then fine
however FAM will never issue that so we need to have optimisations based
on whether its inotify or fam (like for the watch count)
>
> > FAM would
> > need a pending list (as per trunk) as it only has the file change and we
> > need to wait til changes are stabilised before trigger an index
>
> Again, we have this built in right now. We can improve it of course the
> way I suggest above.
nope thats misusing it - we want to prevent indexing it until we are
sure its stabilised. the blacklist is a worst case safety net. All we
are talking about here is not doing any indexing until a certain time
period has elapsed
>
> > Also we are a differential index so i dont understand why you have
> > removed the differential update code? What does it do when a file
> > updates?
>
> Not sure what you mean here?
why is the differential function excluded in tracker-db.c in trackerd:
#if 0
tracker_db_update_differential_index (old_table, new_table, id, sid);
#endif
this means that no tags or other metadata added would update the index
I also cant find it in tracker-indexer. Did you rename it?
jamie
>
_______________________________________________
tracker-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/tracker-list
