From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57818)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j1bv2-000631-1H
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:14:04 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j1bv0-0002Pi-PP
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:14:03 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:51640)
 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 1j1bv0-0002PO-Lq
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:14:02 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j1bv0-0003Tr-Fy
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:14:02 -0500
Subject: [bug#39258] Faster guix search using an sqlite cache
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.39258.B39258.158145203413357@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>
 <CAJ3okZ2EF5244EN3XcO-U9Uz8me42byuPMeUGeGQ_mWi6r864A@mail.gmail.com>
 <87sgjhx92g.fsf@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <87sgjhx92g.fsf@gnu.org>
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 21:13:35 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJ3okZ0sXg7xqFLahk+Ej_aE8bR8GmUMX9DFaRjgNV417xvAsw@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 19:39, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

> > 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.
>
> Yes.  But keep in mind that this package cache is used exclusively for
> package lookups by name.  Namely, the goal is to speed package lookup in

I agree that some confusion happens here. And this cache cannot be improved=
.


> >> 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?
>
> Arun started the discussion on guix-devel with the idea of an inverted
> index, and I thought this would become a second index (possibly
> implemented using SQLite).  Perhaps I misunderstood the discussion all
> along though, let me know!  :-)

Well, your suggestion is very welcome and 2 caches are required: one
for the lookup by name, as it is already (and does a good job);
another one for "guix search" speeds up, SQLite or whatever (based on
inverted index or whatever).


Thanks,
simon