What is more taxing: links or "unlinked mentions"?

I have a fairly large vault with a lot of links.
I was going to remove some of my links to make the vault more efficient, but then it occurred to me that having explicit links might be more efficient than “unlinked mentions”.

What takes up less resources: links or “unlinked” mentions?

A link is cached and will be searched whenever you do link searches, but the unlinked mentions are not cached or available before you open a given document and explicitly ask to see the unlinked mentions. At that time it does a vault wide search on file content to search for the unlinked mentions.

So in my book the unlinked mentions uses less resources in general, but it’s heavy when you call it on a larger vault. Still the resources used by a link will be affected in a negative manner if you turn (and keep on turning) all of your unlinked mentions into links…

I would make links where I feel it natural to make links, and occasionally take a peek at the inlinked mentions to see if there are any cases which deserves to be upgraded. The same applies in reverse, that if you find yourself not using a link you could remove it.

But I wouldn’t use to much energy to try to convert a vault either not using links, nor not having unlinked mentions. If I’d tackle this at all, I might look into removing automatic links which you don’t use.

I.e. if you in every daily note include a link to “journal” to describe what your journal is about, and you never hit that link, then it could be considered removing that. But I’m not sure if it truly serve any purpose, as I reckon most cached links are in a database structure that is made for much larger data sets then we’re able to create naturally in a vault with human based information.

1 Like

Thanks for the reply. This vault (all my films/tv shows) is quite big, and I do use a lot of links (to some directors, some festivals, screenplays) and here are a lot of yaml fields.