Re: [evolution-patches] Re: [Evolution-hackers] Patch for image scale down

[Jeffrey Stedfast <fejj ximian com>]

this one looks fine too

On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 11:15, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> Le mer 08/10/2003 à 14:46, Not Zed a écrit :
> > > Ok, I wasn't clear enough :
> > > 
> > > to fix the scaling performance on very big images to do thumbnails, you
> > > can either :
> > > -use gnome-thumbnail_scale_down_pixbuf which is in libgnomeui >= 2.2 (I
> > > could also copy/paste the function code which is only using gdk-pixbuf
> > > 2.0 code), which can be up to 100x faster than gdk_pixbuf_scale_simple
> > > in these cases. So we only need gtk+ 2.0 in this case.
> > > -use gdk_pixbuf_loader_set_size call, which was introduced in gtk+ 2.2
> > > and will require more changes in the code, since loader is used for
> > > loading both full size and thumbnail image.
> > Hmm, I think in head it's generated separately, but i can't really
> > remember.  An approach at the loader level might be more appropriate,
> > and it already depends on newer libs anyway.  But that depends on if
> > its generated separately.
> 
> I've just did a similar fix for HEAD.. See patch attached
> 
> > > > FWIW i tested the test message on the bug, and i didn't see what i
> > > > would've considered any more delay than i'd expect for such a large
> > > > image - 1/2 to 1 second was all to build the thumbnail.
> > > 
> > > Well, you must have a very fast system or with a lot of memory (I'm not
> > > sure which factor is the most important) :
> > > on my test system (PIII/450) , it takes :
> > > -1min25s to render thumbnail with gdk_pixbuf_scale_simple 
> > > -2s with gnome_thumbnail_scale_pixbuf 
> > > 
> > > I think we have a winner here :)
> > Although i do have a fast box, with plenty of ram (pentium-m 1.5Ghz,
> > 512MB/ram), that difference seems 'quite a lot'.  I wonder if there's
> > some other reason its fast enough on this box.
> 
> It is probably a memory problem, due to matrix computation done by
> gdk-pixbuf..
> 
> > > I've fixed this in the new attached patch..
> > 
> > Ok, It looks ok to me, for 1.4 at least.
> 
> Can I commit it to 1.4 branch ? (sorry, I don't remember if I need two
> reviews or only one, I've confusing with mozilla policy :))
-- 
Jeffrey Stedfast
Evolution Hacker - Ximian, Inc.
fejj ximian com  - www.ximian.com