From: Jani Nikula Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 21:31:53 +0000 (+0300) Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] cli: add support for batch tagging operations to "notmuch tag" X-Git-Url: http://git.tremily.us/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=1a86c20140f2b6d4440a57db25968021ef68c6a6;p=notmuch-archives.git Re: [PATCH 6/8] cli: add support for batch tagging operations to "notmuch tag" --- diff --git a/18/ec857f078e9d3604db869e53f88425f9ad5283 b/18/ec857f078e9d3604db869e53f88425f9ad5283 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..69985fcfd --- /dev/null +++ b/18/ec857f078e9d3604db869e53f88425f9ad5283 @@ -0,0 +1,130 @@ +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 0E5EB431FBC + for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 14:31:55 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.699 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 d5gajtMirzia for ; + Mon, 2 Apr 2012 14:31:54 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com (mail-pb0-f53.google.com + [209.85.160.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) + (No client certificate requested) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 623B2431FB6 + for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 14:31:54 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by pbcuo1 with SMTP id uo1so5547299pbc.26 + for ; Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:31:53 -0700 (PDT) +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=google.com; s=20120113; + h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to + :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; + bh=R7PNME8/t46AkquKSLyj9c69/ym3RE00lN3h8RoGDXQ=; + b=ZgPfIyZM3Yq9L/ltyH+zZv4dmYMM6vWBPiQcCVTyUtDXgWMgV4QNfR2pKSTiJbtNtf + 4MPvCkyiecb/hSZVdr9C5hZFDMfxVX4YTiODT/Z2RVeDI5lwS+mCQbd00w6+fVxwCkIX + eRpTN2PAy3IwuTZ28lafbNdbzazdpQWIlDjt5hahcObETZeg9YATsTn278h+mQi+uvI/ + 4P2vCy8npoJJ84TDsYeR+AFDEDuXptNLWr0sClSHB0GAy9/VPVCw/W3f+CN7tzlwKwf+ + JEFuTmZGUFp5m+vTQhmuisnjmdwm0XCaSJcLCN1k1RDgBgUL2JJt0QEVbHw8sllq83uY + J9gg== +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Received: by 10.68.239.233 with SMTP id vv9mr23869933pbc.75.1333402313538; + Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:31:53 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.68.231.104 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 14:31:53 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.68.231.104 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 14:31:53 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <87fwcl4yr8.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> +References: + + <87ty123tpc.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> + <87aa2tc22z.fsf@zancas.localnet> + <87iphh50hz.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> + + <87fwcl4yr8.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> +Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 00:31:53 +0300 +Message-ID: + +Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] cli: add support for batch tagging operations to + "notmuch tag" +From: Jani Nikula +To: Jameson Graef Rollins +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b33d1903dbdb204bcb8eb79 +X-Gm-Message-State: + ALoCoQn/zOZchnITk4s6DzhfeLot/Wr6sE46B9OCmZmrR7LMT8x47gJOpoY9HKy2kZD1id6B4Zln +Cc: Notmuch Mail +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: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 21:31:55 -0000 + +--047d7b33d1903dbdb204bcb8eb79 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 + +On Apr 3, 2012 12:20 AM, "Jameson Graef Rollins" +wrote: +> +> On Mon, Apr 02 2012, Jani Nikula wrote: +> > Batch tagging brings performance and atomicity by opening and closing +the +> > db only once. The hex encoding handles insane message ids and tags. +> > Otherwise there should be no difference. +> +> I can maybe see performance in terms of opening and closing the db only +> once, but atomicity? Not sure I see how that is improved. + +Err, I meant locking, sorry. Nobody else is able to alter the db while +batch tagging is in progress. + +> +> And shouldn't we be able to improve the handling of command line +> arguments so that we get the same encoding handling on the command line +> as we would from stdin? +> +> jamie. + +--047d7b33d1903dbdb204bcb8eb79 +Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +


+On Apr 3, 2012 12:20 AM, "Jameson Graef Rollins" <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:= +
+>
+> On Mon, Apr 02 2012, Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org> wrote:
+> > Batch tagging brings performance and atomicity by opening and clo= +sing the
+> > db only once. The hex encoding handles insane message ids and tag= +s.
+> > Otherwise there should be no difference.
+>
+> I can maybe see performance in terms of opening and closing the db onl= +y
+> once, but atomicity? =C2=A0Not sure I see how that is improved.

+

Err, I meant locking, sorry. Nobody else is able to alter the db while b= +atch tagging is in progress.

+

>
+> And shouldn't we be able to improve the handling of command line +> arguments so that we get the same encoding handling on the command lin= +e
+> as we would from stdin?
+>
+> jamie.
+

+ +--047d7b33d1903dbdb204bcb8eb79--