[Digikam-users] Digikam slow

Andreas Weigl Andreas.Weigl at silicoids-world.de
Sat Dec 8 21:24:08 GMT 2007


Am Saturday 08 December 2007 schrieb Dotan Cohen:
> > If find prints some files then new files have been written or changed. If
> > their are no new files than the caching in general works.
> > I did this on my system. No new files here.
> No new files.

This means the caching basically works. Good.

> I ran Recreate Thumbnails, then touch testfile, then browse a few
> directories. Sure enough, there are some new files in ~/.thumbnails.
> So I've either hit a limit or there is a caching problem. How can I
> test that?

I think this can only be answered by the developers because I do not know the 
caching algorithm. 

Does anybody know a description of the algorithm besides the source code?

> An instant. However, in ~/.thumbnails/large it took 3.5 seconds, and
> in ~/.thumbnails/normal another 3.5 seconds.

So you do not have a problem with reading the directory contents. I didn't 
thought you have but it is always good to check.

> > You can not clean the .thumbnails directory (you cache would be gone).
> > But I saw that "all files" are in one directory. A structure like squid
> > or postfix is usally much more performant.
> Is that something that I can arrange, or would it be an internal digikam
> issue?

This is digikam internal.

If I have some time I will have a look on the source code. But my C 
programming skills are very poor.

My Public GPG Key:

Too much is just enough.
		-- Mark Twain, on whiskey

More information about the Digikam-users mailing list