Re: archiving speed [was Re: Tips on maintaining history in Org Mode]

[Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2869 bytes --]

I think the problem with just using append to file is that it won't
preserve the shape of the file. For example, if I had a file with

* Notes
** Note 1
   blah blah
** Note 2 blah blah

* Tasks
** DONE task 1
** TODO Task 2

and I decide to archive note 1 and task 1, I would like them to both appear
under the same headings and with the same level. If the process just uses
append to file, I can have this for the first archiving i.e.

* Noes
** Note 1

* Tasks
** DONE task 1

but then later, I decide to archive note 2, if append file is used, I will
end up with

* Notes
** Note 1

* Taks
** DONE task 1

* Notes
** Note 2

which is not what I want. I want

* Notes
** Note 1
** Note 2

* Tasks
** DONE Task 1

So, if we want to preserve hierarchies in our archive files and not have
everything jumbled up together, the system has to parse the file. If you
are also using something like Categories, then even more work needs to be
odne to update the category lists.

What I tend to do is mark items with the ARCHIVE tag and leave them in the
file and then every few months, move archived data to archive files.  It
can still get slow, but I don't do it often, so it isn't too much of a
hassle.


On Thu, 12 Aug 2021 at 08:23, Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:

> thanks for the clarification.  are you saying that, for every archived
> entry, it calculates teh category property, using the original org
> file, in order to add a category property to just one archived entry?
>
> that would certainly slow down more and more, but it sends me back to
> my question about whether append to file would work.
> i.e. build the single entry in a temporary buffer then write that
> region to a file on disk.
>
> On 8/10/21, Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> i should clarify.  bulk archiving slows down even with /nonexistent/
> >> (have not tried empty) archives.  as part of normal and expected
> >> operation, bulk creates the archive for the first entry, and then
> >> subsequent entries are added.  those get slower and slower.
> >
> > That's what I suspected. I also see this and my suggestion helped
> > archiving speed in my case.
> >
> >> i use (olpath category itags).  i will try (file time) when i can, if
> >> that still applies.  my brain needs to be more operational.
> >
> > When you use category, every time you modify the original file (not the
> > archive!), Org mode re-calculates *all* the categories in the original
> > Org file. It happens for every single archived heading. If your original
> > Org file is large, re-calculations make things extremely slow.
> >
> > Best,
> > Ihor
> >
>
>
> --
> The Kafka Pandemic
>
> Please learn what misopathy is.
>
> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com/2013/10/why-some-diseases-are-wronged.html
>
>

-- 
regards,

Tim

--
Tim Cross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4293 bytes --]