[Digikam-devel] extragear/graphics/digikam/digikam

[Andi Clemens]

I always compile digiKam with "debug" instead "debugfull", according to this 
page the only difference is that code is optimized:
http://techbase.kde.org/Development/CMake/Build_Types

Do I have any advantages when choosing "debugfull"?
When I use callgrind for example, it is always better to run with 
optimizations turned on.

Andi

On Sunday 14 June 2009 08:56:09 Gilles Caulier wrote:
> 2009/6/14 Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles at gmail.com>:
> > 2009/6/13 Mikolaj Machowski <mikmach at wp.pl>:
> >> On Saturday 13 June 2009 17:17:37 Gilles Caulier wrote:
> >>> 2009/6/13 Marcel Wiesweg <marcel.wiesweg at gmx.de>:
> >>> >> Result are better than PGF, from speed and space consumption
> >>> >> point...
> >>> >
> >>> > For me results with JPEG are better as well.
> >>> > I have an average size of 11KB per thumbnail (db file size / number
> >>> > of stored thumbnails).
> >>> > Most important for me: Subjectively, loading is faster than with PGF.
> >>> > (With maximum number of icons visible - no sidebars, fullscreen,
> >>> > minimum thumbnail size - I can mouse wheel scroll at a reasonable
> >>> > fast speed without seeing missing thumbnails)
> >>>
> >>> Well, what better then ? JPEG as well with a compression ratio upper
> >>> than 75 (default Qt = 75) ? I recommend 85 instead...
> >>>
> >>> Mik, do you have tried 85 JPEG quality ? And in this case, DB will be
> >>> bigger : which size compared to PGF ?
> >>
> >> JPEG Qt default (probably 75): 147MB for 15000 images
> >> JPEG 85: 184MB
> >> PGF 4: 243MB
> >
> > Thanks Mik,
> >
> > And now, time mesurement. Not easy to do because PC timer is not fine...
> >
> > in digikam/test, i just patched qtpgftest program to measure execusion
> > of encoding decoding PGF and JPEG image to/from byte array with same
> > DB conditions. Look result with small test.png image :
> >
> > [gilles at localhost tests]$ identify test.png
> > test.png PNG 256x256 256x256+0+0 8-bit DirectClass 168kb
> >
> > [gilles at localhost tests]$ ./qtpgftest.shell
> > <unknown program name>(6778)/ main: PGF Encoding time:  0.05  s
> > <unknown program name>(6778)/ main: PGF Decoding time:  0.03  s
> > <unknown program name>(6778)/ main: JPG Encoding time:  0.01  s
> > <unknown program name>(6778)/ main: JPG Decoding time:  0.01  s
> >
> > If i retry test many time, with other image files, i can always see
> > JPG faster... JPEG compression is 85
> >
> > Now, if i take a large image to test (a raw image converted to png):
> >
> > [gilles at localhost tests]$ identify test.png
> > test.png PNG 3594x2397 3594x2397+0+0 16-bit DirectClass 24.58mb
> >
> > [gilles at localhost tests]$ ./qtpgftest.shell
> > <unknown program name>(7467)/ main: PGF Encoding time:  3.61  s
> > <unknown program name>(7467)/ main: PGF Decoding time:  2.65  s
> > <unknown program name>(7467)/ main: JPG Encoding time:  0.66  s
> > <unknown program name>(7467)/ main: JPG Decoding time:  0.6  s
> >
> > Gilles Caulier
>
> Important :
>
> libpgf is compiled in digiKam with full debug symbols : no optimizations.
>
> JPEG codec come from QT4 with debug symbol an certainly full optimizations.
>
> I will recompile digiKam with optimizations options to see the difference.
>
> Gilles Caulier
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-devel mailing list
> Digikam-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel