Bug 385112

Summary:	"Move to Wastebin" - excess disk activity
Product:	[Frameworks and Libraries] frameworks-kio	Reporter:	Kevin Gilbert <kmg952>
Component:	general	Assignee:	David Faure <faure>
Status:	RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Severity:	normal	CC:	elvis.angelaccio, kdelibs-bugs-null, nate
Priority:	NOR
Version First Reported In:	unspecified
Target Milestone:	---
Platform:	Fedora RPMs
OS:	Linux
Latest Commit:		Version Fixed In:
Sentry Crash Report:

Description Kevin Gilbert 2017-09-26 22:48:51 UTC

When using another application with "large" memory requirements (Google's Android Studio), the "Move to Wastebin" results in excessive disk IO before the file(s) are actually moved to the wastebin.

The elapsed time for this IO can be as much as 90 seconds.

Obviously, some Dolphin component has been swapped out and the system is busy bringing that code back into memory.

The question is: Why does this wastebin function require so much code?

Comment 1 Nate Graham 2018-08-22 21:15:00 UTC

It's not clear to me what you're asking here, or if there's anything actionable. Can you rephrase in the form of Steps To Reproduce? See https://community.kde.org/Get_Involved/Bug_Reporting#Steps_to_Reproduce

Comment 2 Kevin Gilbert 2018-08-23 00:36:12 UTC

What I am saying is that, when the system is starved of memory, the Dolphin Wastebin facility is very slow.

As I have added an extra 8GB of memory, I am no longer experiencing this long delay. That said, I still notice disk activity in excess of that I would expect, yes, a subjective assessment.

How to reproduce? Not sure. You would need a number of processes that allocate huge amounts of memory so that the system is using the swap file.

But, as they say, good luck with that. I would not be surprised or offended if you close this bug with "cannot reproduce".

Cheers,
Kevin

Comment 3 Nate Graham 2018-08-27 03:42:05 UTC

The disk activity is probably Bug 76380 if the files are on a different partition/disk from your home folder. Are they? If so, the memory usage is probably just a consequence of performing the (unnecessary) file copy.

Comment 4 Kevin Gilbert 2018-08-27 23:23:06 UTC

No, 76380 is not relevant - the files were on the same file system.

As I said in my previous reply, I cannot now reproduce the problem due to the installation of extra memory. I can only suggest that you close the docket.

Comment 5 Nate Graham 2018-08-28 21:25:48 UTC

All right.