Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>, Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@pobox.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-01-11T13:35:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
2010/1/11 Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>: > Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes: >>> I recall having tried AOX a long time ago but I can't remember the reason >>> why I was not satisfied. I guess I can give another try by setting up a test >>> ML archive. >> >> I tried it too, before I started writing the new prototype archiver >> from scratch. I too forget why I gave up on it, but it was a strong >> enough reason for me to start coding from scratch. >> >> BTW, we only need to replace the archiver/display code. The search >> works well already. > > What the current archiver looks like? A PG database containing the raw > mails and attachements? It that's the case the missing piece would be to > plug a browsing UI atop of that, right? No, the current archiver is a set of MBOX files that are processed incrementally by mhonarc. (yes, this is why it doesn't scale) *search* is in a postgresql database, but it doesn't contain the entire messages - doesn't have attachments for examples - only the parts it has web-scraped off the the current archives. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/