Fate vs Bugzilla for feature tracking

[Andreas Pakulat]

On 21.01.09 23:06:47, Michael Leupold wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2009 22:14:33 Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > On 21.01.09 10:07:17, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > I'm not bound to bugzilla though if there's a better tool to do the job,
> > especially as it seems that our installation still has quite a few problems
> > (I'm regularly seeing database connection errors and its horribly slow
> > often times).
> 
> I've recently blogged about bugzilla's performance deficiencies and how they 
> can be fixed:
> http://www.confuego.org/archives/13-Improving-Bugzilla-search-speeds.html

Was that also on our planet? I recall I've seen some bugzilla related
blog (not Aaron's) but decided to not read.
 
> I already prepared a patch to Bugzilla to allow others to integrate what I 
> developed and submitted it for their review. If it gets accepted I'd also 
> backport it to make integration with bugs.kde.org possible. I can currently 
> think of two drawbacks my solution has:
> - The indexes are huge (I'd guess around 40-80 GiB on bugs.kde.org)
> - New changes aren't pushed immediately to the index. Multi-level indexes 
> ("deltas") are cheap though.

Hmm, maybe I should've dived a bit more into the text-search stuff at
university when studying db-technologies :)

Anyway, just wanted to add that most of the time its slow for me when
loading a bugreport or sending a change to the server. Of course that
could just be somebody else doing a larger query on the db stealing time
from me :)

Andreas

-- 
Afternoon very favorable for romance.  Try a single person for a change.