3 ms·
> we're planning to add lightning-fast searching I don't see the point of discussing a mail client that doesn't have fast full-text search that scales to a mil
by jedbrown 14y ago
> we're planning to add lightning-fast searching
I don't see the point of discussing a mail client that doesn't have fast full-text search that scales to a million messages. If it wasn't designed in from the beginning, why should we have any confidence that it will actually work, when so many still fail to deliver? I use Gmail and Notmuch, both of which I think are best in class, yet are still only barely fast enough.
- tree_of_item 14y agoThis is a free software mail client written for GNOME, so the point of discussing it is largely political. I don't think their goal was to compete with Gmail on technical merit.
- Skywing 14y agoYour comment doesn't make much sense, to me. It's obvious that they've thought about adding search to their client. What about it not being in, at launch, makes you think that it'll be slow? Why is it not worth discussing the mail client? We have a basic web app that we built at work that stores information about tasks that our automated applications perform, so that we can monitor them as they run. We added full text search to it almost six months after building it, and search was a complete after-thought. We chose elastic search and store about 12 million records in a small cluster. We add maybe several thousand per day, on a busy day. This is not a large amount of records, from what I've seen of other clusters. We easily average less than 200ms response times of search queries across all documents, while testing it with about 100 queries per second. I don't know whether or not you consider this fast or slow, but it's pretty snappy, in my opinion. So search doesn't seem all that mystical and complicated to me, but maybe our scenario just makes it appear that way.