On 8/21/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Dirk Mueller</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:mueller@kde.org">mueller@kde.org</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Tuesday, 21. August 2007, Flavio Castelli wrote:<br><br>&gt; We watch recursively all indexed directories. In this way Strigi&#39;s index<br>&gt; will be up-to-date and user searches will be consistent (we won&#39;t return
<br>&gt; deleted or no more valid contents nor we will omit a valid one).<br><br>As I tried to express previously: thats an extremely stupid idea. strigi<br>should not interfer while my &quot;svn update&quot; touches 15000 files. it can do that
<br>when I`m away and do not care about my computer, but it shouldn`t do that<br>while I`m sitting in front of the machine and wait for something to finish.<br><br>I`ve tried to talk about this with Jos already and it seems we have
<br>conflicting goals here. However, from experience with beagle I know that the<br>number 1 complain isn`t that it doesn`t find not-yet indexed documents, but<br>that it drains system ressources like crazy.</blockquote><div>
<br>Why would that be so bad? Of course, it would hurt if you would start re-indexing as soon as something changes. But if you collect changes and do it in batches, it wouldn&#39;t be so bad, and things would be up-to-date. I&#39;m sure it can be smart enough to be unintrusive yet powerfull.
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Dirk<br></blockquote></div><br>