KIO: Mass Copy of Files from Different Sources to Different Destinations

[Dawit A.]

On Wednesday 19 August 2009 11:12:12 David Faure wrote:
> On Thursday 18 June 2009, Alejandro Wainzinger wrote:
> > Using KIO::copy( ... ) to generate more than 150 jobs causes the KIO
> > scheduler to complain:
> >
> > "WARNING - KIO::Scheduler got more than 150 jobs! This shows a misuse
> > in your app (yes, a job is a QObject)."
> >
> > What misuse is this, isn't the KIO::Scheduler supposed to schedule
> > jobs?  I notice that you can directly tell the scheduler to schedule a
> > job with KIO::Scheduler::scheduleJob(...) which will queue jobs when
> > no slaves are left over and possibly avoid this error, but that only
> > works for SimpleJobs, and a CopyJob is not a SimpleJob.
> >
> > Up until now I've worked around it by manually keeping track of jobs I
> > create and jobs that finish so as not to make the Scheduler angry, but
> > shouldn't this be part of the Scheduler's job?
> >
> > I notice most applications don't run into this issue because they use
> > KIO to copy a folder that could contain more than 150 files which is
> > fine, or copy more than 150 files to a single destination, but in my
> > case each file I copy can come from a different source and go to a
> > different destination so I can not aggregate the jobs.
>
> This could be another reason for "all jobs should be scheduled",
> as we were discussing in another thread ("Patch KIO::AccessManager").
>
> I just gave it a try, as an experiment. Shows that scheduleJob has to
> support being called twice for a job, but apart from that, the unittest
> "jobtest" still passes, which is good enough for me :-)

hmm... would this not mean that the "Direct" scheduling method that has been 
the default will go away completely ? In other words, there is no way to have 
a single job per single connection (read: ioslave) support anymore ? I am sure 
most application will remain unaffected, but if there are any applications out 
there that somehow relied on this behavior, then they will be broken, no ?