Re: [Tracker] status of 0.6.90?

[Ivan Frade <ivan frade nokia com>]

Hi

El lun, 06-10-2008 a las 16:58 +0100, ext Martyn Russell escribiÃ:
> Jamie McCracken wrote:
> > There are also a load of other issues that need correcting:
> >
> > 1) enumerating and crawling directories needs to be done in the indexer
> > (and pass directories to watch back to the daemon). Daemon can then run
> > as nice 0 and normal ionice instead of nice 19 as only cpu/io heavy ops
> > will be searches and queries which need to be fast as possible
>
> I really want to do this ASAP. This will reduce DBus traffic
> significantly not to mention it should be faster and reduce the amount
> of memory duplication we have with strings existing in the indexer and
> daemon. The daemon will be REALLY lightweight then and not need to be
> nice()d as Jamie says, so I can't to do this.

 If we want to reduce all the traffic we can merge everything again in
one process }:-)

 Seriously, i am not sure it would be a good idea to move the crawler to
the indexer. If you want move the crawling code away from the daemon, i
would do it to an external process.

Two points:

1) What happens if i want to write different crawlers/monitors? (for
instance, online content).

2) What happens if i want to use the (wonderful) tracker-indexer in
other programs, where i dont need a crawler at all?. If my program just
need an index engine why should i start/configure a crawler?

For example: "lucene" is a full-text-index library, and it doesn't care
about the crawling.

 Regards,

Ivan