Bug 234889 - Updates of Metadata on filesystem is incredible slow
Summary: Updates of Metadata on filesystem is incredible slow
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: Metadata-Date (show other bugs)
Version: 1.2.0
Platform: Ubuntu Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-04-20 15:21 UTC by Frank Hommes
Modified: 2020-08-29 14:55 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In: 7.1.0


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Frank Hommes 2010-04-20 15:21:25 UTC
Version:           2:1.2.0-0ubuntu2 (using KDE 4.4.2)
OS:                Linux
Installed from:    Ubuntu Packages

When I update the Metadata it takes around 2-4 Minutes for 10 Pictures to write the changes to disk.
The CPU goes to 100% for this time.
When I deactivate writing to files and only update the database it goes fast as normal.

The Bug first occured to me after upgrading from 1.0 to 1.2.

If you need any additional information, please let me know.


P.S.: Someone wrote the same bug in another bugreport (https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218633) but I decided to open a new one since the other has differenz topic...
Comment 1 caulier.gilles 2010-04-20 15:23:17 UTC
Which image file format you use ?
Which Exiv2 library version you use ?

Gilles Caulier
Comment 2 Frank Hommes 2010-04-20 15:59:08 UTC
I use exiv2 0.19-1.

The speedproblem occurs with jpg's and raw-file both from my d90.

All the pictures are on a network filesystem via nfs but I just did a test on my local filesystem (ext4) with the same result.
Comment 3 Johannes Wienke 2010-04-20 16:02:10 UTC
Do you use barriers for ext4?
Comment 4 caulier.gilles 2010-04-20 16:06:57 UTC
It must be fixed with Exiv2 code from svn trunk... Please checkout code, rebuild Exiv2 and install it.

Note libkexiv2, digiKam, kipi-plugins need to be re-compiled against new Exiv2, to take effect...

Gilles Caulier
Comment 5 Andreas Huggel 2010-04-20 17:32:01 UTC
This sounds like a duplicate of bug #224094 - an exiv2 regression.
For details see http://dev.exiv2.org/issues/show/677
Follow Gilles' advise and you'll be fine.

Andreas
Comment 6 Frank Hommes 2010-04-20 17:42:47 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 224094 ***
Comment 7 caulier.gilles 2020-08-29 14:55:31 UTC
Fixed with #224094