From: Maxim Nikulin <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bug: fragile org refile cache
Date: Sat, 1 May 2021 21:48:39 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
On 29/04/2021 23:08, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> My experience is exactly opposite. Or maybe I miss something. Can you
Some additions. org-outline-path-cache is used solely by
org-refile-get-targets (maybe there are some calls in other packages)
but it efficiency is questionable. It was not clear for me earlier that
the cache is reset before each scan through a buffer. So if
org-refile-use is disabled, org-outline-path-cache from previous run of
org-refile or org-goto is not used as well. A query to
org-outline-path-cache requires at least one backward search and hash
lookup. During sequential scan in org-refile-get-targets it is enough to
have previous heading path to update it when new heading is found. I
think, org-outline-path-cache should be deprecated.
> Just cleanup heading text:
I have realized what is wrong with this benchmark. It runs so fast
because it matches no headings, so it never spent time for cleaning them up.
> (benchmark-run 1
> (goto-char (point-min))
> (while (re-search-forward "^\\*+" nil t)
> (let ((case-fold-search nil))
should be added before next call and (end-of-line) somewhere later in
> (looking-at org-complex-heading-regexp)
> (if (not (match-end 4)) ""
> ;; Remove statistics cookies.
> "\\[[0-9]+%\\]\\|\\[[0-9]+/[0-9]+\\]" ""
> (match-string-no-properties 4)))))))) => (0.013364877 0 0.0)
On 29/04/2021 21:12, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> For the cleaned heading text, I do not think that re-calculating the
> heading text on each change is a good idea. It may degrade typing
> latency. Yet, an acceptable approach could be simply invalidating cache
> for the changed headings. Then, outline paths can be re-calculated on
> changed headings when needed.
I agree that it is enough to invalidate cleaned heading on edit to
refresh it in org-refile-get-targets. On the other hand, I still prefer
text properties since they could be fetched even if some lines have been
added or removed before. Position-based cache is useless in such cases.
Concerning typing latency, it should be postponed and resumed when no
new edits is performed for certain period of time (~1s). However I am
unsure if it is possible to accurately track all affected lines since
later changes can add/remove lines before the line scheduled for
On 30/04/2021 02:17, Tim Cross wrote:
> I suspect the reason it is not done automatically is that getting that
> right for all use cases is very hard to do without adding adverse impact
> to performance. A cache which is marked as 'dirty' too often results in
> too frequent cache refresh operations, but at the same time, determining
> what changes in an org file actually invalidate the cache can be a
> process intensive operation.
I believed that idea risen in this thread was to regenerate cache
instead of spitting
"Please regenerate the refile cache with `C-0 C-c C-w'"
leaving more tricky cases for the user.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-01 14:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-28 16:09 [PATCH] Bug: fragile org refile cache Maxim Nikulin
2021-04-29 0:50 ` Samuel Wales
2021-04-29 1:29 ` Ihor Radchenko
2021-04-29 1:34 ` Samuel Wales
2021-04-29 12:45 ` Maxim Nikulin
2021-04-29 14:12 ` Ihor Radchenko
2021-04-29 15:04 ` Maxim Nikulin
2021-04-29 16:08 ` Ihor Radchenko
2021-04-29 16:51 ` Maxim Nikulin
2021-04-30 16:56 ` Maxim Nikulin
2021-05-01 14:48 ` Maxim Nikulin [this message]
2021-05-02 6:59 ` Ihor Radchenko
2021-05-04 16:55 ` Maxim Nikulin
2021-05-05 0:53 ` Ihor Radchenko
2021-04-29 13:30 ` Ihor Radchenko
2021-04-29 19:17 ` Tim Cross
2021-04-29 22:43 ` Samuel Wales
2021-05-02 7:03 ` Ihor Radchenko
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).