Re: GVFS recursive directory monitoring

["John McCutchan" <john johnmccutchan com>]

On 8/6/07, Martin <marejde gmail com> wrote:
> On 8/6/07, John McCutchan <john johnmccutchan com> wrote:
> > On 8/4/07, Martin <marejde gmail com> wrote:
> > > I'm curious, what are the plans for recursive directory monitoring in GVFS?
> >
> > No.
>
> Ok... so apps will have to implement this by themselves... either with
> inotify or perhaps with GVFS's monitor API (don't know if this is
> feasible but I guess it should be?). Either way, it seems non optimal.
>

How many apps actually need recursive monitoring? I can think only of
Beagle and other desktop search engines. Apps like f-spot and rhythmbox
monitor N directories where N is small, nautilus/file selector monitor
open windows,
and other apps watch their configuration files. My point being that lacking
this feature is not a problem for 99% of apps. If an application really
needs recursive monitoring they are better off doing it themselves and
using a smarter algorithm than brute force. For example, I have been told
that beagle uses two separate inotify instances, one for busy directories and
one for non-busy directories.

-- 
John McCutchan <john johnmccutchan com>