http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/46/
[148 votes] Solution #1: Auto-generated solution of idea #46


]]> en-us Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:31:33 +0000 Wed, 10 Dec 2008 05:54:55 +0000 QAPoll module http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/46/ Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:49:04 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:50:49 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:34:49 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:46:40 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:23:28 +0000 Tracker also has ruined the search feature in Nautilus.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/476/

Don't rely on projects like Tracker which is rarely updated. It took 3 months to go from 0.63 to 0.64, The 0.64 version hasn't even been back ported to Gutsy.

Gnome needs to stop relying on projects that are lifeless.
]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 04:01:33 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:59:26 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:04:49 +0000 Funny you should say this. Unfortunately it's incorrect. I've been a developer. Here's the thing, even if the application kept a local cache table, this would remove the crawl procedure from all apps. Secondly it would always recognize that the master copy was in tracker. To see a sample, try paperbox. The initial db build is quite long, but once it's finished the app is quite responsive. The point being why do I have 2 extra databases for music and photos when I have a central store as well.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:40:22 +0000
Indexing was a file-system feature. All metadata was stored in fs attributes, on EVERYTHING. There was a single process called the Registrar that knew about many different 'legacy' file formats and would extract data from them into standard FS attributes.

It didn't matter if you renamed your JPEG to .DOC - double clicking it would still open an image viewer, without 'sniffing' the format at launch time.

All you people saying "no" have no idea what you're negating. Tracker is not the greatest *implementation*. Search *will* become pervasive, because it must. I just hope that the Nautilus folks get on board and start depending on FS attributes, etc.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:59:31 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 00:42:59 +0000
I used BeOS and I loved it and I still vote this down, because Tracker is not only "not the greatest" implementation, it's a downright *disastrous* implementation!!

Do it right or don't do it. It's a job for file system writers, not Ubuntu maintainers.]]> Sat, 01 Mar 2008 04:09:45 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 13:11:56 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 16:17:30 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 20:12:46 +0000 Sun, 02 Mar 2008 09:57:35 +0000 just to have a conversation aboout the issue!
on my system (athlonXP 2600+) tracker is just a PITA. but having tracker properly implemented would be a good thing nonetheless.]]> Mon, 03 Mar 2008 13:27:24 +0000
Change the title, maybe.]]> Tue, 04 Mar 2008 21:11:10 +0000
The fact that tracker can be a pig is a problem with tracker.

The fact that these other apps don't use it is a problem with those apps.

]]> Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:23:54 +0000
Technically, the issue with performance with tracker has to do with how much ext3 sucks. Some of those issues will be gone when ext3 gets mounted differently.

Currently, what happens is that linux saves a last-read-timestamp on every file. So when tracker indexes it, it also has to write it. Hence the trashing. This has become worse over time. Although most of you associate this with tracker, all file-io with lots of small files is horrible at the moment in linux. Nothing tracker-specific about it. The only reason to get rid of this is to minimize all file-io. One way to do this is to disable tracker, but programs like rhythmbox, f-spot, firefox will still trash your drive a little. Also by default io-nice and nice is not synchronized at all. So all file-io can make your system freeze. That needs to be fixed, but it has nothing to do with tracker.

Secondly, to save memory and prevent defragmentation, tracker writes temporary files and then merges them. The only reason other indexers (luscene) seem to trash less is because they work slower, because they are not as optimized. You can configure tracker to be just as slow. The indexing done by applications themselves is usually so bad (rhythmbox, f-spot) it eats cpu instead of IO. The reason it doesn't annoy you as much is because you are in control when those applications index. The new tracker will have a tray icon to pause and to easily set the performance penalty.

Finally: tracker is and will remain part of gnome. So you can expect all official gnome-apps to take advantage of it sooner or later.

So people, disabling tracker is just a placebo effect. As are so many so called 'optimizations' and 'tweaks'.



]]> Sun, 16 Mar 2008 03:46:47 +0000 > tracker is and will remain part of gnome. So you can expect all official gnome-apps to take advantage of it sooner or later.

That's the reason why I voted UP]]> Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:28:52 +0000 Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:32:45 +0000
It sucks on XFS, too.
In fact, it stinks on ice.

I'm off to go search for and if not found suggest an idea to allow to easily avoid allowing tracker to index. I don't feel a need to remove it from my system, but I use google desktop to index and it is about a million times faster and less abusive to my system, as hilarious as that is.

Someday when Linux gets a decent disk I/O scheduler then perhaps tracker indexing will be OK. (I'm not that mad at Linux, no other OS seems to have one either.) Until then less-rude applications will have to handle search. And if you use a decent filesystem (hint: not ext3) then just doing a find is not so painful (especially if you know how to use your search tool... e.g. find(1).) I want what tracker can give me. I just don't think it should ever kick my computer's ass when I'm trying to use it.]]> Fri, 09 May 2008 14:12:21 +0000
it's using too much ressources i want to deciede on my own, if i want usb-drives to be searched automaticially
]]> Fri, 23 May 2008 12:09:50 +0000 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:56:26 +0000
And that it's NOT the case, I've never seen an Ubuntu/Linux package so broken, so instead of asking to "use tracker as a backend for everything" we should ask "made the damn thing works"

To all the people talking about performance. That's not so important when you can't find "anything" with tracker.....]]> Wed, 10 Dec 2008 05:54:55 +0000