Comment 10 for bug 1666676

Carlos [2017-02-28 12:08 -0000]:
> "Tracker imposes a huge cost due to always indexing everything"
> As long as is low priority and the kernel scheduler works fine it shouldn't be an issue.

This isn't true. This will use a lot more CPU and disk cycles, thus decreasing
battery life. Or, if you don't index while on battery, it's going to be even
less reliable.

> "So I don't see how "enable tracker" can ever be a replacement for typeahead
> search" Maybe I was not clear enough in my first post. (don't mean to be
> rude, just clear) Tracker is needed for search in Nautilus. Period.

That's the bit I'm totally not convinced of. Due to it's "background/async"
nature, it's not reliable for searching, and it's also way too much overhead to
replace a single-directory level search (i. e. what you usually do for
typeahead search). Doing a fully recursive search is okay to be slow, as that's
only being used seldomly, and if you do it you most probably want the results
to be correct, not approximative.

So my (very subjective) opinion is that any indexing tool is not an appropriate
backend for searching. This isn't particularly tracker's fault, it's just the
nature of what an indexer is. Also, note that I'm not speaking authoritatively
for the Ubuntu desktop team, this is just my personal opinion. I would just not
appreciate it to see getting an indexer imposed onto everyone for rare use
cases (like content-based batch renaming) -- optimize for the common case
instead. As I said, if you care about content preview etc., it's still fine to
give users an opt-in into this.