Moving Baloo and Baloo-widgets into KDE SC

Àlex Fiestas afiestas at
Fri Dec 27 23:46:35 GMT 2013

On Friday 27 December 2013 18:31:19 Ivan Čukić wrote:
> > The most notorious exceptions are to this rule are nepgoogle and webminer.
> > Maintainers of both projects are already working on porting them to Baloo.
> This I like.
> Baloo seems to be working very nice (I've been running it for some time
> now), so if all clients are being ported, then I have no problems with the
> transition.
> It just *needs* to be smooth and stable. It would be awful if the first
> impression of baloo was the same as with the first releases of plasma and
> nepomuk.
> Cheerio,
> Ivan

Indeed, if we are proposing this for 4.13 it is because we are deeply 
committed on making sure Baloo actually *fixes* the problem. The switch will 
only be done once Baloo covers all Nepomuk functionality offered by the SC.

To ensure that the quality is actually better than Nepomuk we want to make 
this dog-foodable as soon as possible for all users of "KDE SC master", since 
right now the only interface to use Baloo is Milou[1] (which works wonderfully 

Special focus is being put on resource consumption, and here there is no doubt 
that Baloo uses less Memory (ram and disk) and less CPU than Nepomuk. At the 
moment of writing this:
	RAM: 55M
	Disk: 221M
	Query: 027ms
	Emails: 317560 in 6.6min (index time 2.1)
	Files: 27K in 5min (phase 1 and 2)

	RAM: 700M
 	Disk: 191M
	Query: 332ms
	Index time: 5h for 13K files (phase 1 and 2)
	Emails: 7000 in 1h, meaning it will take 41h for 30K.
	Indexing time gets worse with time, it was around 500ms per email when I 
stopped it, from my experience it gets easy into 700ms.

The query was "Ivan".

Given this results, worse case scenario to get all functionality we actually 
have with Nepomuk (which will mean having baloo and nepomuk running at the 
same time) will mean that much overhead, which imho is acceptable.

Cheers !

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list