Tim wrote: > Tim: >>> Ugh, rather than store data in a sane way in the first place, do more >>> work on top of it, repeatedly. I'm reminded of mail programs that >>> continually re-index their mail folders, rather than update their >>> indexes when things get changed, leaving them alone in the meantime. > > > Mikkel L. Ellertson: >> No - this was in a way to handle files that were added, but were >> missing the data, not files created properly. IN other words, how to >> handle files that would otherwise fall through the cracks. > > I still think it'd be better to change the mechanism for how files are > saved, so it's fixed at the right moment. Having to have something > always assessing the drive, it just doing more work, continuously. We > could end up with a never ending procession of file preening daemons > running all the time, otherwise (locate, plus update, plus...). > Please explain what you mean. Where are you saying the change should be made? Where are you coming up with something always accessing the drive? Are you saying that the system should check every file as it is being saved, and set the mime-type, instead of letting the application that creates the file do it? Granted, this would do away with having any kind of cleanup cron job being run, but it would add overhead to saving every file. You still have the problem of how to handle files that do not have a "magic number". Mikkel -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
