Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-03 Thread Srinivasa Ragavan
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 13:51 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 10:18 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > This sounds really great. If you have the bugs/patches please post them > > across. > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=425464 Looks fine. Approved on bugzilla. -Srin

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-02 Thread Øystein Gisnås
2007/4/2, Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 09:03 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote: > > I'd also love to create scripts, code and test data to test > > performance of some of the most important functions. Then we would be > > able to track performance over time in a more scientifi

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-02 Thread Ross Burton
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 10:18 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > This sounds really great. If you have the bugs/patches please post them > across. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=425464 Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-02 Thread Ross Burton
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 10:18 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > This sounds really great. If you have the bugs/patches please post them > across. e-vcard.c | 494 +- 1 file changed, 232 insertions(+), 262 deletions(-) Urgh. Give me a m

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-02 Thread Srinivasa Ragavan
Ross, On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 09:11 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 09:03 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote: > > I'd also love to create scripts, code and test data to test > > performance of some of the most important functions. Then we would be > > able to track performance over time i

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-02 Thread Ross Burton
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 09:03 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote: > I'd also love to create scripts, code and test data to test > performance of some of the most important functions. Then we would be > able to track performance over time in a more scientific way. http://burtonini.com/bzr/eds-tests/ Check

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-02 Thread Ross Burton
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 01:12 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote: > I discovered a bottleneck for addressbook performance with large > addressbooks. Details at > http://n800evolution.blogspot.com/2007/04/libebook-scalability.html > > A proposed fix is attached. I'm not sure if order matters when > returned

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-02 Thread Øystein Gisnås
2007/4/2, Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 01:12 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote: > > I discovered a bottleneck for addressbook performance with large > > addressbooks. Details at > > http://n800evolution.blogspot.com/2007/04/libebook-scalability.html > Looks fine to commi

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-01 Thread Srinivasa Ragavan
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 01:12 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote: > I discovered a bottleneck for addressbook performance with large > addressbooks. Details at > http://n800evolution.blogspot.com/2007/04/libebook-scalability.html Looks fine to commit. > > A proposed fix is attached. I'm not sure if order

Re: [Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-01 Thread Matthew Barnes
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 01:12 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote: > I discovered a bottleneck for addressbook performance with large > addressbooks. Details at > http://n800evolution.blogspot.com/2007/04/libebook-scalability.html > > A proposed fix is attached. I'm not sure if order matters when > returned

[Evolution-hackers] libebook scalability

2007-04-01 Thread Øystein Gisnås
I discovered a bottleneck for addressbook performance with large addressbooks. Details at http://n800evolution.blogspot.com/2007/04/libebook-scalability.html A proposed fix is attached. I'm not sure if order matters when returned from the backend? Does anyone know? If not, g_list_reverse can be o