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 6FA4D6DE0BA5 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 10:47:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.016, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 EbFykNWJqk3p for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 10:47:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-f43.google.com (mail-lf0-f43.google.com [209.85.215.43]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A6B16DE0BA2 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 10:47:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf0-f43.google.com with SMTP id c80so810543lfh.0 for ; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 10:47:41 -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:references:in-reply-to:user-agent:message-id :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fNDqPkOIeCmYo0vpwaFRhBpDXkNcBmhEVfqbBpfsnDs=; b=bF6RWml//PqFBVNjIXMrYBBG/jHc7G8pJjVXf+WrNEatl616RYQ+qzl4BO59Y78Jq7 tM4op7ZFTo8fJ5coXzfgtN7dyKsUAYwhugm2+heQemW5JepgDLSwFNYZ9hqUQMbpgOm3 zV06KOFmk7IB7KP09bCGqeXzytUtVIIhZiko6EfU6JDOixRjKTTXI4UYXuwNQ4/T+rXt T91A2QQZ6AYQRBAGC5diAHbut5iZ0dSQpBz/57puF6Ao+vm3rkP8iN+vbfdx4tFIzHvG M4eHK8uh1HkSrjjyD25eoI6usVu2/gQlNlXEDzbQetk2V4SG7RrJpRYHW9D+RtVwgU0u 2u3A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:references:in-reply-to :user-agent:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fNDqPkOIeCmYo0vpwaFRhBpDXkNcBmhEVfqbBpfsnDs=; b=NET2WtjCupd7RUk4etqrHe4Jz0ycHh4t9uuwS+P9NnBvsQ0xX3E5K8uE4JDCRSEa8C tl72KW4ZfXmGc1w7/FsM8a1trLVs9zM2dFCr349bWUdv1OApvSukNvwKYF+UX6qC8ew1 AYsvvDWywpLvc64VnrGdAVPL96TfVSuBKwTBTS0gdgtspdklE8bYiettIqTcLJVeAyai 7UGWuoLkzMmF9gI2rk1vhkIQ+40FBwRFpLIrqiLF6084uw5XPlHsFS9+GToOgornM2ZD jRSo5qnuiYD6Bhjdr3bP8wkM6xZagIvYtHdAFkliL0eUFGE7QamTTsumJkjtjXAHxY0Y WlpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUiNP8JvHh6fuxfs0paTdW9sov+B5Vi0U8hky5dz1eKKWLu7D/uE xH+0ElYZOjzIly7n X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QBqtkkkfOsdeyOgkmbtWKS5j8YOeDHVvRkM/XXhILu1DMMWKI9KeJfMRitPH8CdDXR5j5yiAw== X-Received: by 10.46.14.10 with SMTP id 10mr12156ljo.11.1504806458974; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 10:47:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (cm-84.215.128.252.getinternet.no. [84.215.128.252]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z25sm36689lja.47.2017.09.07.10.47.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 07 Sep 2017 10:47:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 17:47:34 +0000 From: Gaute Hope Subject: Re: [PATCH] WIP: add thread subqueries. To: David Bremner , Jani Nikula , notmuch@notmuchmail.org References: <87378ml59b.fsf@nikula.org> <20170820213240.20526-1-david@tethera.net> <87efs5g0sq.fsf@tethera.net> In-Reply-To: <87efs5g0sq.fsf@tethera.net> User-Agent: astroid/v0.9.1-58-g0bc68af7 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1504806079.rug5z5bxr4.astroid@strange.none> 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: 2.1.23 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: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 17:47:46 -0000 David Bremner writes on august 21, 2017 3:35: > David Bremner writes: >=20 >=20 >> If you're interested in this feature, please test, let me know if it's >> workable for your use case. The syntax here is thread:{$query}. The >> usual caveats about whitespace apply. The running example is >> >> thread:{from:me} and thread:{from:jian} and not thread:{from:dave} >> >=20 > I was playing around with this, and >=20 > 'thread:"{from:bremner and date:2017}"' and thread:{from:sitaram} >=20 > is about 10x faster than without the date restriction. This is roughly > proportional to the number of threads matching the first subquery. > Unfortunately the date restriction needs to be inside the subquery with > the current design. So just to clarify; to make true full thread searches there cannot be more = than one term in each thread:{} query? Otherwise, all terms in each thread:= query must be found in at least one message at the same time. So you could= put the date: restriction in a separate thread:{}, but it would be slower? -gaute =