Bug 126683 - Abysmall performance over a NFS home directory when doing quick search
Summary: Abysmall performance over a NFS home directory when doing quick search
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 126103
Alias: None
Product: kmail
Classification: Applications
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Platform: Mandriva RPMs Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: kdepim bugs
Depends on:
Reported: 2006-05-03 18:11 UTC by FACORAT Fabrice
Modified: 2007-09-14 12:17 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description FACORAT Fabrice 2006-05-03 18:11:28 UTC
Version:            (using KDE KDE 3.5.2)
Installed from:    Mandriva RPMs
OS:                Linux

Here is my configuration :
- NFS ( v3 over TCP ) home directory. The NFS server is using hardware RAID ( RAID5 ) and ext3 as filesystem
- many folders with many mail. Test done on a folder with 8275 mails

I noticed that when filtering mail in this folder ( by typing something in the search field ), kmail will use an extremely high CPU usage and the interface will be frozen. After some time, kmail will respond but doing action on the filtered email will be slow. For example right-clicking to select "Answer to" will take a long time to show the contextual menu.

May it be possible that kmail is doing the filtering directly with the files on the disk ? If yes, should kmail use a fast cache for email From-To-Subject-Tags-Status fields and do the fast search with this cache ? It will be faster ( especially for people with config like me ) and will make kmail more responsive. Of course this cache should be in sync whatever a new email is added or removed.
For people saying I should cleaned or organized my folders, i already have many folders and need archive to do search. Each year i will move the email to another folder. So this means that this folders only have mails from 2006.
Comment 1 Thomas McGuire 2007-02-21 17:39:07 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 126103 ***