On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:10:18 +0100, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Patrick Ohly
<patrick.o...@intel.com> wrote:
I've said before and I say it again here, I consider performance
comparisons pointless at this time.
Considering that e-d-s has a much more modest feature set than
tracker
(tracker in general being a much more ambitious project), I would
have
expected it to to trounce tracker in performance, which doesn't seem
to be the case.
This evidence might prompt to re-evaluate this part of the
architectural plans. Or at least leave the door open to transitioning
back to tracker when it's feasible.
If you're interested in the saving performance of both solutions, I
answered the thread on the Tracker ML (didn't want to cross-spam
Meego-Dev). If you abstract the fact that EDS has no batching API (and
therefore seems to issue a fsync after saving each contact) by running
it over libeatmydata, EDS is approximately twice faster than
qtcontacts-tracker (though that area is being optimized currently). I
haven't done any contact fetching benchmarks.
Cheers
Adrien
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
MeeGo-dev@meego.com
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
