Re: blog post on gnus, dovecot, and lucene

[Rainer M Krug <Rainer@krugs.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1552 bytes --]

Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:

> Vincent Bernat <bernat@luffy.cx> writes:
>
>>  ❦  8 octobre 2014 22:15 +0800, Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> :
>>
>>>> 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.
>>
>> I have done a doveadm fts rescan to get those indexes updated. So, maybe
>> the solution could be a cronjob?

Instead of a cronjob, one could run it after the sync with offlinesync
(I am sure mbsync can do it as well) as a hook which is executed
automatically. But there is still the issue of updating after moving
messages from gnus. 

>
> Right, that should work fine. At that point, though, I'm inclined just
> to have dovecot run as a daemon...

I think the daemon is the better way to do it.

Cheers,

Rainer

>
>
>

-- 
Rainer M. Krug
email: Rainer<at>krugs<dot>de
PGP: 0x0F52F982

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 494 bytes --]