Earlier quoted context omitted.
With atuin, it's available immediately on other local session (panes, windows, tabs etc). There's also remote sync, so after some configurable amount of time, it's even available on other devices.
+ if you don’t like this, you can have it filter by session by default!
Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
31–40 of 198 posts
Re: Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
With the server, is it primarily a gateway to the hosted SQLite databases? eg receives incoming shell history to store in the backend, and maybe do some searches/retrievals of shell history to pass back? eg for shell completion, etc If that's the case, then I'm wondering if it could work in with online data stores (eg https://api.dbhub.io <-- my project) that do remote SQLite storage, remote querying, etc.
We currently use postgres. The server is very dumb, verifies user authentication and allows paging through the encrypted entries. There's a PoC that allows it to work with SQLite too for single user setups - and we are thinking of switching to a distributed object store for our public server since we don't need any relational behaviour.
One of our developer members mentioned they're learning Rust. I'll point them at your project and see if they want to have a go at trying to integrate stuff.
At the very least, it might result in a Rust based library for our API getting created. :D
Re: Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
One such cost could be database size. I currently have 45k history entries in my database and it sits at roughly 15MB in size due to database indices along with the additional data we store
But it's a cost shared by all open shells, right? Well, even if it was 15MB per shell session, it should still be worth it if the startup and searching is faster. For comparison: I use extended ZSH history format, which records a timestamp and duration of the call (and nothing else), and I have ~65k entries there, with history file size, as mentioned, 3.8MB. It could be an order of magnitude larger and I still wouldn…
Re: Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
#34I think Magical shell history is a better title.
While sqlite is pretty cool technology, it doesn't quite deserve the title of "magic".
Re: Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe it’s a setting. You can choose to save history and either merge history on session exit or immediately. At least it is a setting for zsh
You’d think this would be even more robust with a sqlish storage backend than the usual text files used for history.
Re: Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
#36I installed it and simple commands take noticeably longer. Is there any way to make it faster?
Re: Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
#37Re: Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
#38No one ever addresses the most important problem: how to separate commands that one would like to retain (preferably indefinitely) vs garbage commands (like cd, ls, cat, etc.) that should better be wiped in a few days.
Re: Atuin replaces your existing shell history with a SQLite database
#39Has anybody seen any huge performance regressions using atuin? I installed it and simple commands take noticeably longer. Is there any way to make it faster?