On Friday 27 December 2013 18:31:19 Ivan Čukić wrote: > > The most notorious exceptions are to this rule are nepgoogle and webminer. > > Maintainers of both projects are already working on porting them to Baloo. > > This I like. > > Baloo seems to be working very nice (I've been running it for some time > now), so if all clients are being ported, then I have no problems with the > transition. > > It just *needs* to be smooth and stable. It would be awful if the first > impression of baloo was the same as with the first releases of plasma and > nepomuk. > > Cheerio, > Ivan
Indeed, if we are proposing this for 4.13 it is because we are deeply committed on making sure Baloo actually *fixes* the problem. The switch will only be done once Baloo covers all Nepomuk functionality offered by the SC. To ensure that the quality is actually better than Nepomuk we want to make this dog-foodable as soon as possible for all users of "KDE SC master", since right now the only interface to use Baloo is Milou[1] (which works wonderfully btw). Special focus is being put on resource consumption, and here there is no doubt that Baloo uses less Memory (ram and disk) and less CPU than Nepomuk. At the moment of writing this: baloo_file: RAM: 55M Disk: 221M Query: 027ms Emails: 317560 in 6.6min (index time 2.1) Files: 27K in 5min (phase 1 and 2) Nepomuk: RAM: 700M Disk: 191M Query: 332ms Index time: 5h for 13K files (phase 1 and 2) Emails: 7000 in 1h, meaning it will take 41h for 30K. Indexing time gets worse with time, it was around 500ms per email when I stopped it, from my experience it gets easy into 700ms. The query was "Ivan". Given this results, worse case scenario to get all functionality we actually have with Nepomuk (which will mean having baloo and nepomuk running at the same time) will mean that much overhead, which imho is acceptable. Cheers !