Carlos Garnacho

80 posts

Carlos Garnacho

Carlos Garnacho

@garnacho

Katılım Ocak 2009
19 Takip Edilen551 Takipçiler
Carlos Garnacho
Carlos Garnacho@garnacho·
@nekohayo A larger amount of text documents would come to mind, or the setting that controls how much text is indexed was changed from its defaults. Tracker checks to vacuum its database during shutdown.
English
1
0
0
0
Jeff 🎆
Jeff 🎆@nekohayo·
@garnacho As for Tracker's indexer cache size, it's quite possible it's running into some sort of issue on my 200GB laptop (cache weighs 2 GB) that doesn't occur on my 2TB desktop (where the cache fits in 400MB). I have no idea why it would bloat that much more on a much smaller disk.
English
1
0
0
0
Jeff 🎆
Jeff 🎆@nekohayo·
I know, not a fair comparison, but still... Tracker3 vs FSearch database sizes. Pretty much the same amount of files. FSearch indexes the whole system in mere seconds (instead of 1h), uses _gigabytes_ less on my size-constrained SSDs, and returns results faster.
Jeff 🎆 tweet media
English
3
2
7
0
Carlos Garnacho
Carlos Garnacho@garnacho·
@nekohayo Overall, FSindex seems a nice project, if it does what you want it to do. Looking at a distance, I think adding more features is likely to involve sacrifices to some or several of the advantages you brought up. I bid them welcome to the ungrateful world of filesystem indexers.
English
1
0
1
0
Carlos Garnacho
Carlos Garnacho@garnacho·
@nekohayo 4/ Query speed: FSearch claims as-you-type search speeds, Tracker can make similar claims through full-text search. Nautilus does run in parallel a slow recursive basename search over the filesystem, I wonder if you are mistaking the whole for Tracker.
English
1
0
1
0