Re: Proposed module: tracker

Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
  Having tried tracker 0.5.3 for a couple of days what I have to say is:
    1. it uses little memory;
    2. it requires _a lot_ of CPU power.

  Basically point 2 is a killer.  No one is going to want to run this
except in servers.  Keeping the CPU busy almost 100% of the time is not
nice: consumes more power, gets my computer fan running faster and more
loudly.. I can't even begin to imagine what a nightmare it will be for
laptop users..

point 2 is scheduled at nice +19 (same with Ionice +7) so it only uses more cpu if its idle. And cpu is only used if indexing (first run only takes a long time). After first run, cpu usage is generally negligible so its a one time hit.

Also try running a game or something cpu heavy while tracker is indexing and you will see tracker cpu drop to ~1%

I do believe this is the right way to schedule a service (via the OS) if not we can add periodic sleep periods but am not convinced we can do it better than the OS. I mean I can easily make it consume less than 50% of cpu by sleeping half the time but that will slow indexing proportionally.

Im open to people's thoughts on this... (IE is 100% cpu usage at nice+19/ionice+7 during indexing really a problem?)

(I note locate pretty much uses similar 100% cpu while indexing too)

  Maybe this kind of indexing technology, be it tracker or beagle, is
simply not something that we want to shove into users' desktops.  Either
this gets much much better optimised in the future, or we have to wait
for more powerful hardware.  In any case, I'm -1 for including tracker
in GNOME 2.18; let's wait and see how this evolves at GNOME 2.20 time.

Im sure it will be better for 2.20. Release team can withdraw tracker from 2.18 proposed modules with my permission.

Mr Jamie McCracken

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]