Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62EC2431FD0 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 03:59:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.99 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.99 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ClBklQrPfRH4; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 03:59:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from yoom.home.cworth.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CC94431FB5; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 03:59:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by yoom.home.cworth.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8C3F62540E0; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 21:59:05 +1000 (EST) From: Carl Worth To: Austin Clements , Michal Sojka Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] new: Do not defer maildir flag synchronization during the first run In-Reply-To: <87pqrk10wm.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> References: <1295603977-14326-1-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> <1295603977-14326-3-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> <87pqrk10wm.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 21:59:05 +1000 Message-ID: <87mxmn27w6.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 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: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:59:07 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 19:15:21 +1000, Carl Worth wrote: > Yes, that is much simpler and should work equally well as the original > patch. ... > So, I think I've convinced myself that the change is actually OK. For those reasons, I'm pushing the patch now. > But then I'm also wondering if perhaps we could do the processing undefer= red > in all cases? >=20 > I haven't thought that through, but I'd be glad to hear your ideas. This is still an open question if anyone wants to pursue it, (it might make it simpler to then fix the atomicity bugs with adding new messages to the database, and only later adjusting the maildir filename). On that topic, if we decide we do need to defer the tags/flags mapping, then the real fix is to probably also defer the addition of the filename to the message document in the database. If we change these things only at the same time, then we should be able to avoid any problems with things getting out of synchronization. =2DCarl =2D-=20 carl.d.worth@intel.com --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFNQAyJ6JDdNq8qSWgRAjqhAJ9/3egYIcz3pfHbVVYnMtKYh58mWACfZGWR Wc+I3Xfvg2jH6k1EIEvZkvY= =s1y+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--