From: Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
To: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: Second draft of logging patches
In-Reply-To: <877hgln9xg.fsf@rocinante.cs.unb.ca>
References: <1286803617-17328-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net>
	<1287954066-24512-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net>
	<877hgln9xg.fsf@rocinante.cs.unb.ca>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-11-g48b5e00 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 06:25:57 +0100
Message-ID: <87vd41pzfe.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, David Bremner wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 18:01:02 -0300, david@tethera.net wrote:
> > Here is my second try at logging, taking into account the feedback I
> > got from Rob and Michal.  There is definitely some tidying to do; in
> > particular I know the protoypes in public headers need
> > documentation. Also, I should add a configuration option to
> > enable configuration by command or something like that.
> 
> I had a thought of a possibly interesting application of the (yet to be
> written) log playback code. It could be use to implement a simple
> queuing system where commands are only logged but not actually run on
> the database. I'm not sure about the performance implications, but it
> could be interesting because it eliminates the need to have a server
> running in order to eliminate write contention for the tag database.
> The "queue runner" could be as simple as a cron job, or it could be
> something spawned by one of the queue operations; the point would be
> that queueing could continue while the snapshot of the queue was run.

Hi, I think this could be very interesting and that it could make the
tagging operation asynchronous and thus faster as was suggested by
Sebastian in id:"87k4l5whwe.fsf@SSpaeth.de".

In this case, however, the queuing should happen in the client, not in
the library.

-Michal