[Nepomuk] Re: Review Request: Do not use Nepomuk::Types in the nepomukindexer

[Sebastian Trueg]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101522/#review3754
-----------------------------------------------------------


Before I look at this in detail I wanted to propose one thing: How about we expose the ClassAndPropertyTree from the storage service via DBus. Then clients can easily check ranges, domains, and so forth without the need to build any internal tree.
Then maybe at some point we might even port Nepomuk::Types to use that API which would also mean a performance increase.

- Sebastian


On June 6, 2011, 10:50 a.m., Vishesh Handa wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101522/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 6, 2011, 10:50 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Nepomuk and Sebastian Trueg.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> Nepomuk::Types classes are very expensive as they load all the type properties in one go. While this was acceptable when the WriterData was initialized only once, with the new Strigi Service architecture, the WriterData is initialized each time a file in indexed. It doesn't make any sense to load all the properties each time. 
> 
> Specially since we only use the range() and literalRangeType() of Nepomuk::Types::Property 
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   nepomuk/services/strigi/indexer/nepomukindexwriter.cpp 71d2e54 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101522/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Compared previous and current indexed data for an mp3 file.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Vishesh
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/nepomuk/attachments/20110607/6a523c07/attachment.htm