From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/85102 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: blog post on gnus, dovecot, and lucene Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 22:15:52 +0800 Message-ID: <87a956wstj.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87y4sszb70.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <878uks9ooo.fsf@zoro.exoscale.ch> <87iojvzvtk.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1412777831 21484 80.91.229.3 (8 Oct 2014 14:17:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:17:11 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M33346@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Oct 08 16:17:02 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xbs33-0001kF-Dm for ding-account@gmane.org; Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:17:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Xbs2F-00059a-TD; Wed, 08 Oct 2014 09:16:11 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Xbs2D-000597-JA for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 08 Oct 2014 09:16:09 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Xbs2B-0006fd-V8 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 08 Oct 2014 09:16:09 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xbs2A-0005fF-1D for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:16:06 +0200 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xbs29-0001MS-QN for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:16:05 +0200 Original-Received: from 125.77.224.30 ([125.77.224.30]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:16:05 +0200 Original-Received: from eric by 125.77.224.30 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:16:05 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 50 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 125.77.224.30 User-Agent: Gnus/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:VZB8bknUU/spbXZGCrijXYiYVZ8= X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:85102 Archived-At: Vincent Bernat writes: > ❦ 8 octobre 2014 00:30 +0800, Eric Abrahamsen  : > >>> Note that you don't have to run dovecot as a server. You can run it as a >>> process. In mbsyncrc: >>> >>> Tunnel "/usr/lib/dovecot/imap -o mail_location=maildir:~/.mbsync/mails/XXXXX" >>> >>> In Gnus: >>> >>> #+BEGIN_SRC elisp >>> (nnimap-stream shell) >>> (nnimap-shell-program "/usr/lib/dovecot/imap -o mail_location=maildir:~/.mbsync/mails/XXXXX") >>> #+END_SRC >> >> Yes, hence the section titled "The Problem" in that blog post :) Perhaps >> I could have made that clearer! > > Oh, it was pretty clear but I didn't read from the beginning because I > thought this was a post about reading mails offline with full text > search available! ;-) > >> So far as I can tell, if you're calling dovecot as a process, you can't >> integrate lucene text indexing -- that only works when running dovecot >> as a daemon. >> >> In fact that was the whole impetus for the shift, and the blog post: >> going from dovecot-the-process to dovecot-the-daemon, because of the >> need for search indexing. > > I didn't notice that. I added that to my dovecot.conf: > > plugin { > fts = lucene > fts_lucene = whitespace_chars=@. > } > > And the search became faster. However, I usually don't use FTS (only > search on recipient or title). If I check right now, I notice that the > indexes are not up-to-date. So, you may be right. But it's pretty interesting that that did something -- I wasn't sure that calling dovecot as a process would even invoke the configuration files at all. But you don't think the indexes were updated, huh? It might be worth amending the blog post at some point. I've asked about this stuff on the dovecot mailing list, but no one seemed to know. E