Re: [Tracker] Ready for merge

[Martyn Russell <martyn imendio com>]

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.

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.

> 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.

> 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?

-- 
Regards,
Martyn