[Nepomuk] Review Request 110317: kinotify: Optimize the filterWatch process
Simeon Bird
bladud at gmail.com
Sun May 5 16:54:05 UTC 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/110317/#review32097
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it!
Good idea! Much cleaner.
- Simeon Bird
On May 5, 2013, 11:26 a.m., Vishesh Handa wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/110317/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 5, 2013, 11:26 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Nepomuk, Àlex Fiestas and Simeon Bird.
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> kinotify: Optimize the filterWatch process
>
> The FilterWatch is used to to not add watches to everything.
> Specifically we do not add watches to names in the exclude list. Also
> we only monitor for creation and modification events in the include
> folders.
>
> FileIndexerConfig::shouldFileBeIndexed and shouldFolderBeIndexed have a
> lot of duplicate code internally. They both use the expensive RegExp
> cache.
>
> It's better if we only use the RegExp cache once.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> services/fileindexer/fileindexerconfig.h 9d2d890
> services/fileindexer/fileindexerconfig.cpp b09c915
> services/filewatch/nepomukfilewatch.cpp fbbf3db
>
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/110317/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> It's faster
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vishesh Handa
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/nepomuk/attachments/20130505/fab77c60/attachment.html>
More information about the Nepomuk
mailing list