Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:31:15 +1300
From: martin f krafft <madduck@madduck.net>
To: Ben Gamari <bgamari@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20100219003115.GB25162@lapse.rw.madduck.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Ben Gamari <bgamari@gmail.com>,
	notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
References: <20100217235211.GC2628@lapse.rw.madduck.net>
	<1266453115-sup-7880@ben-laptop>
	<20100218015847.GB3480@lapse.rw.madduck.net>
	<1266459453-sup-7234@ben-laptop>
	<20100218024802.GA795@lapse.rw.madduck.net>
	<1266463007-sup-8777@ben-laptop>
	<20100218034613.GD1991@lapse.rw.madduck.net>
	<1266467977-sup-3504@ben-laptop>
	<20100218045943.GA6152@lapse.rw.madduck.net>
	<1266469478-sup-2095@ben-laptop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-ripemd160;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="i9LlY+UWpKt15+FH"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1266469478-sup-2095@ben-laptop>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: [notmuch] nested tag trees (was:  Mail in git)
Precedence: list


--i9LlY+UWpKt15+FH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

also sprach Ben Gamari <bgamari@gmail.com> [2010.02.18.1810 +1300]:
> Yeah, this is a bit of a bummer. This is really a stretch, but I wonder
> if the git folks would accept patches/minor database semantics changes
> in the name of making git more flexible as a general purpose object
> database. I really doubt it, but you never know.

I am pretty sure they won't. Git is a content tracker, not a general
purpose filesystem. It's a bit of a shame.

> > Instead of nested subtrees, think of 16 subtrees forming
> > a level-1 hash table, or 256 for level-2, which really *ought*
> > to be enough.
> >=20
> > Anyway, rewriting a tree object is pretty much exactly the same
> > as removing a line (e.g. a message ID) from a file (e.g. a tag),
> > as that file would have to be fully rewritten.
> >=20
> This is very true, but exactly do you mean by this statement?

That any form of tag-to-message mapping will be expensive when you
have a million messages referenced. If you used symlinks like mairix
does, any manipulation would require changes to the directory index,
which =E2=80=94 curiously =E2=80=94 functions much like the subtree approac=
h you
proposed.

--=20
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
=20
"the faster i go, the behinder i get."
                                                    -- lewis carroll
=20
spamtraps: madduck.bogus@madduck.net

--i9LlY+UWpKt15+FH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="digital_signature_gpg.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREDAAYFAkt929MACgkQIgvIgzMMSnXIsgCghP4cLWWgw726uOaD72Be0bsn
a+QAoNfuYUWlRQXJLoKTBcCX4ww+VaAK
=gDbp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--i9LlY+UWpKt15+FH--