Re: New Control Centre

[jamie <jamiemcc blueyonder co uk>]

On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 08:29 -0500, JP Rosevear wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 10:14 +0000, jamie wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 21:19 -0600, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> > > El mar, 06-02-2007 a las 12:52 +1100, Russell Shaw escribió:
> > > 
> > > > If profiling has to be done to make a menu faster, it is pretty obvious
> > > > the system it is built on is stupidly inefficient and broken, especially
> > > > if said menu is slow on a 10 year old pc.
> > > 
> > > Ah, bingo.
> > > 
> > > Almost 10 years ago, when GNOME started, we had like three apps we
> > > wanted to put in the menus.  So, reading .desktop files from disk didn't
> > > seem like a bad idea.
> > > 
> > > Now that we have hundreds of .desktop files, it is not a good idea
> > > anymore to have them scattered all around the disk.  You are absolutely
> > > right; the system it is built on is stupidly inefficient and broken!
> > 
> > Yes and its fairly easily fixed with tracker once I add .desktop file
> > indexing to it
> 
> They are already indexed in beagle, so it would be fairly easy to do
> this with libbeagle right now, but you'd still have to mimic all the
> tree building code with the categorizations in gmenu.


you would not have to do that with tracker - you could just say get me
all apps in category X or app starts with "ev*". 

A sql database is much faster and useful for that than a lucene based
indexer like Beagle. 

Sqlite uses btrees so theres no need to maintain trees in memory when
you use the right technology. 

(lucene/beagle uses hashtables and is not comparable to an btree based
sql database. Hashtables are useless for wildcard searches whereas
btrees are fully optimised for this as they store stuff in alphabetic
order as opposed to being randomly distributed in a hash)

jamie.