Bug 201083 - Kmail consumes huge amount of memory while displaying email with large attachments
Summary: Kmail consumes huge amount of memory while displaying email with large attach...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 110574
Alias: None
Product: kmail
Classification: Applications
Component: GUI (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Platform: openSUSE Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: kdepim bugs
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-07-22 10:18 UTC by Anshul Jain
Modified: 2010-03-06 15:07 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:

Attachments
Add an attachment

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Anshul Jain 2009-07-22 10:18:49 UTC 
Version:            (using KDE 4.2.96)
OS:                Linux
Installed from:    SuSE RPMs

I'm using Opensuse 4.3 RC1 Release 4.2.96 "Release 142" & Kmail version 1.12.0. I have an email with 2 large PDF attachments of 3.1MB and 1.5MB. I have set the appearance view to "display beside the message pane". Now if I start Kmail (and not Kontact) the memory consumed through htop is approx 60MB. If I click on this email with the large attachment, the memory jumps upto 90MB and if I click on a normal text message it comes back to 60MB.

This is reproducible everytime.I can give provide a screenshot and any other information if needed.
Comment 1 Martin Koller 2009-08-03 13:54:24 UTC 
Can reproduce it:
having a small mail current gives: VmData:   147380 kB
clicking on a mail with a 5.6MB attachment gives: VmData:   175200 kB
going back to the previous small mail: VmData:   147380 kB (as it was)

So now the question remains, why ... ?
Comment 2 Jaime Torres 2009-08-10 09:43:39 UTC 
Right now, to show a mail, the mail is copied several times (3 or 4 times).
This will be solved when kmail uses akonadi (probably kde 4.5).
Comment 3 Bartosz Kwitniewski 2009-11-29 15:05:23 UTC 
It might be realted to bug #110574
Comment 4 Björn Ruberg 2010-03-06 15:07:16 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 110574 ***