From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6AB86DE02DA for ; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 09:32:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.186, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5htUAc3ln1DR for ; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 09:32:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com (mail-wm0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E83A76DE01BE for ; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 09:32:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id v199so27145257wmv.0 for ; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 09:32:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gaute-vetsj-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:user-agent :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cF9F4QF68lBd4ZlYSGL6Rg8R/az90WWQWTLJ4cN4Lag=; b=tglDyXQtAKPsu4ez3d+tcn6LHngTvMCqFAQi6SsSCHdfOh2m7zndYHpF3PqjYcXp+v RNGTGTAWFeomoZ5zKZYykurUWmALDQlemv99+4OcfzoMm5nF57aP7JEEkVuPuJloHJco XAX62UxPPB7VR0N6MCC7FAAZrH0Ogb5i9jUBtYCH5srT0QzAa8dAhrFR4QaunU2ugkq1 Wy5TtFextQaT93EyiFfhFMy00vUT9i16vyJbJuXkqUy5/9GjBHSb1TBSByv2LZn6oKyR +qFzWnG1JQJH9iDvGD0wankwTb9AxI3ZEkqwbDHIwEjx2EVlQWMFKFWvGXhnJsCQBadL RLwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to :user-agent:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cF9F4QF68lBd4ZlYSGL6Rg8R/az90WWQWTLJ4cN4Lag=; b=VfPWWYdEcru/XOcrLbVHBR5j/jLFl4kaoNl6m/WQNwyJpY2DB4VpxlB+93Ukkimq9/ AA+zsjD+JOHPYPwTfZj7Ih8UBDqrPvVmqEBGlDbz9sl9LXB9KburKTX0nm3bU2gJNjJ7 8sbaBkamw8BH3DQsBAD33d7IGVFCnhKE8e5PwOgIj3oMr8wnxaTzmdGCvqZMmKbaZUfk oJBJMe/F30eANUdLYlVK3aInGLQx4EEH/mmM7yIuu2s4D10KyOU83pxF9jrvUBQH3eFh 9nsVjOjFVJaoaOQo9Hx6HK2415GbcR4d6mnC8I/30JvbjJvteD24JrQO4FAA10YD2gw1 XZVg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLRW5wR17fJSdFNgwlQ7MNRTHRhhFhsbMRW5dV1LseIAURRjCfXRQpKl1nkjumreQ== X-Received: by 10.28.154.144 with SMTP id c138mr2525025wme.63.1465662737016; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 09:32:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (241.89-20-241.enivest.net. [89.20.241.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q71sm4879619wme.17.2016.06.11.09.32.15 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 11 Jun 2016 09:32:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 16:32:14 +0000 From: Gaute Hope Subject: Re: [PATCH] WIP: regexp matching in 'subject' and 'from' To: David Bremner , Austin Clements Cc: sfischme@uwaterloo.ca, notmuch References: <1465265149-7174-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net> <1465525688-30913-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net> <1465547660-astroid-0-nudmv20lbk-1296@strange> <87a8itxpu7.fsf@zancas.localnet> In-Reply-To: <87a8itxpu7.fsf@zancas.localnet> User-Agent: astroid/v0.5-221-g4c2c7173 (https://github.com/gauteh/astroid) Message-Id: <1465662533-astroid-3-6vuqm3zu54-1296@strange> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 16:32:28 -0000 David Bremner writes on juni 10, 2016 13:09: > Gaute Hope writes: >=20 >> >> Cool! >> >> Would it break a lot of things if you just replace the original prefix? >=20 > It would change the matching behaviour. I guess there are people that > like the current "sloppy" matching of from: and subject:. In my > not-very-scientific tests, it is a factor of 5 to 10 times slower to do > regexp search, which makes sense because it is effectively post > processing the results from Xapian. At least on my system it seems fast > enough to be usable interactively, but that is a pretty shocking > performance regression. And I know there are people with more mail on > slower systems. Maybe we could check if the search string contains a regexp and decide whether to pre-process it on the background of that? I think that would make the interface more user-friendly. You'd just always use search whether you decide that you need to put in some regexp or not. >=20 >> Could it be made to work on the message body? >=20 > See Austin's previous reply for the details, but basically no; these > "values" index in terms of whole strings, while the body is indexed by > terms (roughly, words). In principle we could add a value slot for the > body, but I think that would at least double the size of the database > (maybe more). >=20 I would rather have double the db and be able wildcard beginning of terms. If it is not too much maintaining overhead it might be made optional? Regards, Gaute =