Re: [Evolution] Migrating Evolution

[Steve T <stevetucknott yahoo co uk>]

On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 11:52 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 16:11 +0000, Steve T wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 09:12 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: 
> > > On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 07:11 +0000, Steve T wrote:
> > > > > As long as you copy everything while neither Evo nor Gconf are
> > > > running
> > > > > (see the FAQ answer) then you should be OK. The first time the new
> > > > > version of Evo runs on the new machine it will do any required
> > > > > conversion.
> > > > > 
> > > > > poc
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Patrick,
> > > > The 'migration' in this case was from FC9 to FC12 (on separate
> > > > laptops)
> > > > - the 'old' Evolution settings were 'Backed Up' via the Evolution
> > > > option
> > > > and that file was then used in the start up routine on the new laptop
> > > > to
> > > > import the setting etc (there was an option to import the data and
> > > > settings from a file).
> > > > 
> > > > That all ran fine and I now have what appears to be a fully working
> > > > Evolution running under FC12. 
> > > > 
> > > > The only issues that I see so far are:
> > > > 1) The 'search' folders seem very slow in updating the screen display.
> > > > It takes a while (Generating Message list) moving between one folder
> > > > and
> > > > the next.
> > > 
> > > Is this always the case, or only when visiting a folder for the first
> > > time? If the latter, it could be the conversion to SQL that's taking the
> > > time (I don't know if this happens "on demand" or just once when Evo
> > > starts up).
> > 
> > It's all the time - both at startup (about 5+mins to have fully
> > processed the inbox), and then switching search folders after load can
> > be slow. I have quite a few 'search' folders and the length of time
> > taken to display the contents seems directly related to the complexity
> > of the search (ie number of criteria) 
>
> That could happen of course, for very complex searches.

It seems like swings and roundabouts - on the old FC9 version, it is far slower at 'Storing The Folder' after leaving it whereas the FC12 Evolution seems far slower  at opening the folder.
> > > > 2) The unread count in the folders is not always accurate. This seems
> > > > to
> > > > self correct when Evolution is closed down and restarted.
> > > 
> > > Known bug. I get it too. Very annoying. And it doesn't always go away
> > > just by restarting Evo. Sometimes you have to unsubscribe the folder,
> > > sometimes even disable the mail server and re-enable it.
Just FYI - it seems that it only resets the count on the folder that you're working on. IE if I'm in my 'Last 24 Hours' folder and read a mail, it doesn't reset the count on the other 'search' folders that may include that mail.
> > So far it has been ok with just restarting Evolution. But it's not
> > major for me - a bigger problame that I've noticed is that the search
> > folders don't always honour the rules. A case in point is a search
> > folder that I have for the 'Last 24 Hours' where the rules are sent
> > after a day ago or received after a day ago. Under the 'new' version
> > that has been showing mails that are weeks old (that do not appear on
> > the 'old' version. 
>
> I don't use "Sent Date" for anything as it's unreliable (it depends on
> the sender having a working clock). Have you tried Right-click Refresh
> on this folder?
The problem doesn't appear on the old FC9 version - so it doesn't appear to be data dependent (same data being retrieved on both the FC9 and FC12). 
> Also, you haven't said if you're using IMAP or POP. It might be
> relevant.
I'm using POP. So both the FC9 and FC12 retrieve the same data. The mail collection leaves the mail on the servers.
> > > > I'm not reporting those two as issues per se - I'll check around over
> > > > the next few days to see what I can find.
> > > > 
> > > > PS Can you see where the 'indexes' etc are now held in mysql?
> > > 
> > > they are .db files under ~/.evolution/mail.
> > > 
> > > > And does
> > > > that means that all the 'summary' files etc in the evolution folder
> > > > structure are now completely redundant?
> > > 
> > > No idea I'm afraid.
> > > 
> > > BTW if indexing seems slow you can run the following script (due to
> > > Srini), after shutting down Evo completely (--force-shutdown):
> > > 
> > >         cd ~/.evolution/mail/
> > >         for i in `find . -name folders.db`
> > >                 do
> > >                 echo "Rebuilding Table $i"
> > >                 sqlite3 $i "vacuum;"
> > >         done
> > >         
> > 
> > I've created a job from that. I tried it by shutting down Evolution,
> > then running the job (it showed the 'databases' being processed) - but
> > after restarting Evolution the speed was still the same. I'm not sure
> > whether  the speed problem is in table structure or in the
> > indexing/purging of the 'deleted' space. 
> > 
> > I have just tried switching on the 'old' system to the 'worst' search
> > folder and that comes up in a couple of seconds - in the new version,
> > that's now in minutes.
>
> Do you mean you have two parallel installations of Evo? I'm not sure how
> that would work.
See above. I have two laptops (one FC9 and the other with the newly installed FC12) working with remote POP servers. The mail on the POP servers is deleted manually.
> poc
Apologies for the delay in replying - I thought I had replied a couple of days back (it's my age)!
> _______________________________________________
> Evolution-list mailing list
> Evolution-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list