https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
--- Comment #12 from Knut Hildebrandt ---
Well, this seems to be a duplicate of Bug 374925.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
Rigo Wenning changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDSINFO |RESOLVED
Resolution|WAITINGFORINFO
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
Justin Zobel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REPORTED|NEEDSINFO
Resolution|---
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
Knut Hildebrandt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||knut.hildebra...@gmx.de
--
You are receivin
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
Daniel Vrátil changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dvra...@kde.org
--- Comment #9 from Daniel Vrát
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
Thiago Jung Bauermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thiago.bauerm...@gmail.com
--
You are
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
--- Comment #8 from Rigo Wenning ---
Absolutely. I have a 4core 8GB with SSD. The slowest thing on the machine is
Akonadi. It now takes 15 seconds to load my calendar as I moved from one ics
file to an ics folder for reasons of resilience.
The initial
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
--- Comment #7 from Martin Steigerwald ---
Well filesystems with bigger journal *can* work faster for different reasons. I
am not sure at all whether the write caching would give any performance
benefit. And well yes, it if goes through the database it
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
--- Comment #6 from Martin Steigerwald ---
Rigo, yes, it doesn´t help to avoid the caching. And if you prefer the file
based caching, then reduce the SizeThreshold again, yet for recoverability I
think there isn´t that much of a difference as file_db_da
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
--- Comment #5 from Rigo Wenning ---
did everything suggested (size indication in config, fsck and vacuum). I did
move around 1200 messages from the imap account to a local folder before doing
akonadictl fsck. I have currently 198 files in the file_db_d
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
--- Comment #4 from Martin Steigerwald ---
Rigo, I suggest you review
[kdepim-users] Work-around to issues with Akonadi file based caching (was: Re:
rant)
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kdepim-users&m=142382010023511&w=2
regarding open issues to Akonadi´s fi
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
--- Comment #3 from Rigo Wenning ---
I have a file_db_data directory with 57450 files. So it hasn't synchronized
locally since ages IMHO. If it synchronizes now, it will probably create a
mess. BTW, I fully support your thoughts in [1]. Note I'm using o
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
Martin Steigerwald changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mar...@lichtvoll.de
--- Comment #2 from Ma
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
Christian Mollekopf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mollek...@kolabsys.com
Component
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
--- Comment #1 from David Faure ---
sounds more like a bug in the maildir resource, no?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Kdepim-bugs mailing list
Kdepim-bugs@kd
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341192
David Faure changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fa...@kde.org
--
You are receiving this mail bec
16 matches
Mail list logo
