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 2E3D86DE2C69 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:09:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.010, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 iq76u9SF9I1h for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47D716DE2C67 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dPd5Y-0002l1-Vw; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:06:37 -0400 Received: (nullmailer pid 19192 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 26 Jun 2017 23:09:46 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Matt Armstrong , Daniel Kahn Gillmor , Gaute Hope , notmuch@notmuchmail.org, Xu Wang Subject: Re: finding incoming messages in threads in which i've participated [was: Re: find threads where I and Jian participated but not Dave] In-Reply-To: References: <87bmprtqgo.fsf@tethera.net> <87fuf1nnl5.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <8737b1rojw.fsf@tethera.net> <1497594312.ahjx44w937.astroid@strange.none> <87r2ydgh9t.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <1498111587.9x086zp6wn.astroid@strange.none> <1498112439.apimm1pnum.astroid@strange.none> <87efu8t6ia.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <87vank9egp.fsf@tethera.net> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 20:09:46 -0300 Message-ID: <8760fi9whx.fsf@tethera.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 23:09:52 -0000 Matt Armstrong writes: > David Bremner writes: > > It has some subtle implications. E.g. when I tag through a particular > UI do I mean to tag a particular message or the thread? Is it worth > making the user think about the difference? Is there some way to > express this such that they never do? Are some tags configured to > always apply to the thread? Are these the only tags that do? Or do > "thread tags" always contain the union of all associated message tags? My initial thinking is that thread documents would just have the union of the terms (tags and otherwise) of all messages in the thread. So they'd be visible only when querying, and not need to be dumped and restored. Before I get too worried about the UI (i.e. how does one specify that a query is meant to be applied threadwise), I want to have some idea about the time and space costs of maintaining those extra documents in the database. d