high load problems when tagging

[Arnd Baecker]

Hi,

when associating tags, I encounter a substantial CPU load,
caused by (sometimes several) kio_digikamdates and
kio_digikamalbums processes.

The origin of this seems to be the following:
At some point one gets on the konsole:
"Noticed file change in directory /home/username/Pictures"
(i.e. the directory containing the database!)
this then triggers DIO::scan
which then calls in dio.cpp in
void Watch::slotDone(KIO::Job*)
    Digikam::AlbumManager::instance()->refresh();
    Digikam::AlbumLister::instance()->refresh();
I.e. those which then lead to the invocation of
kio_digikamalbums and kio_digikamdates.

One possible solution: do not set a
  d->dirWatch->addDir(d->libraryPath)
in AlbumManager::startScan() .
For me, this works fine! ;-)
However, I don't know whether there are any side-effects...
Gilles, Marcel, Andi, what do you think about this issue?

All this is for 0.9.x;
I haven't looked into 0.10 wrt to this issue.

Best, Arnd

P.S.: This might be or not related to
"Updating tags is slow when thumbnails are visible"
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=167056

I also found an older one
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=430380
which sounds similar.

_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[Marcel Wiesweg]

> The origin of this seems to be the following:
> At some point one gets on the konsole:
> "Noticed file change in directory /home/username/Pictures"
> (i.e. the directory containing the database!)
> this then triggers DIO::scan
> which then calls in dio.cpp in
> void Watch::slotDone(KIO::Job*)
>     Digikam::AlbumManager::instance()->refresh();
>     Digikam::AlbumLister::instance()->refresh();
> I.e. those which then lead to the invocation of
> kio_digikamalbums and kio_digikamdates.
>
> One possible solution: do not set a
>   d->dirWatch->addDir(d->libraryPath)
> in AlbumManager::startScan() .
> For me, this works fine! ;-)
> However, I don't know whether there are any side-effects...
> Gilles, Marcel, Andi, what do you think about this issue?
>
> All this is for 0.9.x;
> I haven't looked into 0.10 wrt to this issue.

You can look into 0.10, because there is simple filtering set up for just this
case. (the modification dates of all files in the directory are compared to
last time, the db file taken out, and the dirwatch signal is ignored if
nothing else has changed)

Marcel
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel