Jun 21, 2020

File tagging outside of fs hierarchies and db for tags

File tagging is one useful concept that stuck with me since I started using tmsu and made a codetag tool a while ago to auto-add tags to local files.

For example, with code, you'd usually have code files and whatever assets arranged in some kind of project trees, with one dir per project and all files related to it in git repo under that.

But then when you work on something unrelated and remember "oh, I did implement or seen this already somewhere", there's no easy and quick "grep all python files" option with such hierarchy, as finding all of them on the whole fs tends to take a while, or too long for a quick check anyway to not be distracting.

And on top of that filesystem generally only provides filenames as metadata, while e.g. script shebangs or file magic are not considered, so "filetag" python script won't even be detected when naively grepping all *.py files.

Easy and sufficient fix that I've found for that is to have cronjob/timer to go over files in all useful non-generic fs locations and build a db for later querying, which is what codetag and tmsu did for years.

But I've never came to like golang in any way (would highly recommend checking out OCAML instead), and tmsu never worked well for my purposes - was slow to interface with, took a lot of time to build db, even longer to check and clean it up, while quierying interface was clunky and lackluster (long commands, no NUL-separated output, gone files in output, etc).

So couple months ago found time to just rewrite all that in one python script - filetag - which does all codetag + tmsu magic in something like 100 lines of actual code, faster, and doesn't have shortcomings of the old tools.

Was initially expecting to use sqlite there, but then realized that I only index/lookup stuff by tags, so key-value db should suffice, and it won't actually need to be updated either, only rebuilt from scratch on each indexing, so used simple gdbm at first.

Didn't want to store many duplicates of byte-strings there however, so split keys into three namespaces and stored unique paths and tags as numeric indexes, which can be looked-up in the same db, which ended up looking like this:

"\0" "tag_bits" = tag1 "\0" tag2 ...
"\1" path-index-1 = path-1
"\1" path-index-2 = path-2
"\2" tag-index-1 = path-index-1 path-index-2 ...
"\2" tag-index-2 = path-index-1 path-index-2 ...

So db lookup loads "tag_bits" value, finds all specified tag-indexes there (encoded using minimal number of bytes), then looks up each one, getting a set of path indexes for each tag (uint64 numbers).

If any logic have to be applied on such lookup, i.e. "want these tags or these, but not those", it can be compiled into DNF "OR of bitmasks" list, which is then checked against each tag-bits of path-index superset, doing the filtering.

Resulting paths are looked up by their index and printed out.

Looks pretty minimal and efficient, nothing is really duplicated, right?

In RDBMS like sqlite, I'd probably store this as a simple tag + path table, with index on the "tag" field and have it compress that as necessary.

Well, running filetag on my source/projects dirs in ~ gets 100M gdbm file with schema described above and 2.8M sqlite db with such simple schema.

Massive difference seem to be due to sqlite compressing such repetitive and sometimes-ascii data and just being generally very clever and efficient.

Compressing gdbm file with zstd gets 1.5M too, i.e. down to 1.5% - impressive!
And it's not mostly-empty file, aside from all those zero-bytes in uint64 indexes.

Anyhow, point and my take-away here was, once again - "just use sqlite where possible, and don't bother with other local storages".

It's fast, efficient, always available, very reliable, easy to use, and covers a ton of use-cases, working great for all of them, even when they look too simple for it, like the one above.

One less-obvious aspect from the list above, which I've bumped into many times myself, and probably even mentioned on this blog already, is "very reliable" - dbm modules and many other "simple" databases have all sorts of poorly-documented failure modes, corrupting db and loosing data where sqlite always "just works".

Wanted to document this interesting fail here mostly to reinforce the notion in my own head once more. sqlite is really awesome, basically :)

Member of The Internet Defense League