Re: [Evolution] Migrating Evolution
- From: Steve T <stevetucknott yahoo co uk>
- To: evolution <evolution-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [Evolution] Migrating Evolution
- Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:51:18 +0000
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
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.
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
] [Thread Prev