From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id mmujJFY8hF/VaQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:21:58 +0000 Received: from aspmx2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id WIIUIFY8hF+8IgAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:21:58 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx2.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 089C46803E6 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:21:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:38022 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRvts-0005Es-Ox for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 07:21:56 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37662) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRvti-0005Dh-FF for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 07:21:46 -0400 Received: from relay11.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.231]:42717) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRvtg-0005T5-FI; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 07:21:46 -0400 Received: from bababa (lfbn-idf2-1-1094-122.w90-92.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.92.160.122]) (Authenticated sender: mail@ambrevar.xyz) by relay11.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E511100009; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:21:41 +0000 (UTC) From: Pierre Neidhardt To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: File search progress: database review and question on triggers In-Reply-To: <87eem3u4n8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87sgcuh8rb.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <86imd4e7cr.fsf@gmail.com> <87eenspcf8.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <865z94dz83.fsf@gmail.com> <87zh6gns4l.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87zh5c7hx6.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87k0w4zw8q.fsf@gnu.org> <875z7oijxu.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87eem3u4n8.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 13:21:40 +0200 Message-ID: <875z7f6663.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.70.178.231; envelope-from=mail@ambrevar.xyz; helo=relay11.mail.gandi.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/12 07:18:45 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD=0.499, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1.999, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Mathieu Othacehe Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx2.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx2.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -3.11 X-TUID: 7GLC+1ZfhdKg --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >> - Include synopsis and descriptions. Maybe we should include all fields >> that are searched by `guix search`. This incurs a cost on the >> database size but it would fix the `guix search` speed issue. Size >> increases by some 10 MiB. > > Oh so this is going beyond file search, right? > > Perhaps it would make sense to focus on file search only as a first > step, and see what can be done with synopses/descriptions (like Arun and > zimoun did before) later, separately? We can do this in a 2nd step, no problem, I only did the benchmark to answer Simon's question whether we could include both data in the same database and which size/speed cost it would incur. > It would be nice to see whether/how this could be integrated with > third-party channels. Of course it=E2=80=99s not a priority, but while > designing this feature, we should keep in mind that we might want > third-party channel authors to be able to offer such a database for > their packages. Wouldn't it work automatically for any substitute server? >> - Find a way to garbage-collect the database(s). My intuition is that >> we should have 1 database per Guix checkout and when we `guix gc` a >> Guix checkout we collect the corresponding database. > > If we download a fresh database every time, we might as well simply > overwrite the one we have? But then we would miss the database when switching Guix generation. Cheers! =2D-=20 Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/ --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQFGBAEBCAAwFiEEUPM+LlsMPZAEJKvom9z0l6S7zH8FAl+EPEQSHG1haWxAYW1i cmV2YXIueHl6AAoJEJvc9Jeku8x/dxIH/Agj9QQeL8cGZnbffd62Yrw3PhfT5k7e 8m5Gyj7J0IKXoqrqGZzA7U4Wa78hPnyD+cH0FaoEIJ1B/mOvhgJbnwuvvyg9aACe hZ/n4Bm0zkbQvdDlAvwbcxeqz4KcVU+eeegxnQExatVIAniAunqk3jC+l/EPdMth CcJ9dsKgNzVq3XlJPS+7IR+hgkkm2MNzFbEQKMKQAkxKNmwJQlpNfrrD7jXkk4Vy u8dVjGnKAew39wgecxC7C+qFFBk9x3vpiW1KSg7UBvS1JYD00LOzjJgwp1kRSi8k hYBQudGVORvKFUQwK3zqa+PpaHBIfydb6hy3j41t0qnRg4YMblOPcYM= =mTNO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--