234
edits
User:Sspitzer/GlobalFrecency: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
User:Sspitzer/GlobalFrecency (view source)
Revision as of 21:26, 29 December 2007
, 29 December 2007no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
spin off bug: | spin off bug: | ||
// UpdateBookmarkHashOnRemove() does a sanity check using | // UpdateBookmarkHashOnRemove() does a sanity check using | ||
// IsBookmarkedInDatabase(), so it might not have actually | // IsBookmarkedInDatabase(), so it might not have actually | ||
// removed the bookmark. should we have a boolean out param | // removed the bookmark. should we have a boolean out param | ||
// for if we actually removed it, and use that to decide if we call | // for if we actually removed it, and use that to decide if we call | ||
// UpdateFrecency() and the rest of this code? | // UpdateFrecency() and the rest of this code? | ||
4) | 4) | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
5) | 5) | ||
spin off bug: | |||
for now, punt on this and for annoations for updating frecencies | upon moving a bookmark, update the frecency. for unvisited bookmarks, this bumps the frecency, because we use PR_Now() as the pseudo visit, which is desired, as we're expressing interest. For visited bookmarks, it may age the bookmark and lower frecency. Is that desired? for now, punt on this and for annoations for updating frecencies. | ||
5) | 5) | ||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
6) | 6) | ||
spin off bug: | |||
we recalc twice on idle, one for invalid and one for old frecencies. need marco's last_visit_date change to make old work right, or do a subquery until then. right now, we are going to recalc the same places over and over. (if we do a sub query, watch out for performance) | we recalc twice on idle, one for invalid and one for old frecencies. need marco's last_visit_date change to make old work right, or do a subquery until then. right now, we are going to recalc the same places over and over. (if we do a sub query, watch out for performance) | ||