From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58115)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j1aBc-0001x4-0X
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:23:04 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j1aBb-0001Th-0j
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:23:03 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:51537)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1j1aBa-0001Sl-TB
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:23:02 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j1aBa-0000jp-IH
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:23:02 -0500
Subject: [bug#39258] Faster guix search using an sqlite cache
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.39258.B39258.15814453342748@debbugs.gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cu7pnfaar36.fsf@systemreboot.net>
 <CAJ3okZ05JXVgbKJd_WeJKERJd6rc4SwxLRrRR0AyW48QDyX8eQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <cu74kwdawc7.fsf@systemreboot.net>
 <CAJ3okZ0GXS9ibh__1DFsuCCjO82R6-YXtPAOF3GoquN=sSsaWA@mail.gmail.com>
 <cu7y2tkadwi.fsf@systemreboot.net>
 <CAJ3okZ37rFh=SB-f6nqc0kMpCai=pw2D0-GFiakXY1p4FHHftA@mail.gmail.com>
 <cu7v9oka341.fsf@systemreboot.net> <8736bhytn9.fsf@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <8736bhytn9.fsf@gnu.org>
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 19:21:55 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJ3okZ2EF5244EN3XcO-U9Uz8me42byuPMeUGeGQ_mWi6r864A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net>, 39258@debbugs.gnu.org

Hi Ludo,

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 17:29, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

> I would rather keep the current package cache as-is instead of inserting
> sqlite in here.  I don=E2=80=99t expect it to bring much compared
> performance-wise to the current simple cache (especially if we look at
> load time), and it does increase complexity quite a bit.

Complexity is about taste. ;-)
About performance, the idea was to first implement something with
sqlite and then see if it makes the difference. I mean I have
understood that.

> However, using sqlite for keyword search as you initially proposed on
> guix-devel does sound like a great idea to me.

If I understand correctly, you are proposing 2 caches, right?
Or are you proposing an inverted index (VHash/VList table) based on
trigrams to speed up the lookup?

Cheers,
simon