> On Jan. 12, 2014, 4:11 p.m., Vishesh Handa wrote: > > This is awesome. Ship it! > > If you want you can also get rid of the IndexCleaner completely. I think ti > > might be better to move it into the KCM, and only run it when the > > configuration changes. There isn't much point running it each time. > > Simeon Bird wrote: > Thanks! > > Do you mean remove IndexCleaner from the IndexScheduler, and have the KCM > do something like this, for a cleaner which is implemented, and can clean > specific paths: > > if some folders were removed from the path, or the exclude filters > changed, or a total re-index was requested: > suspend indexing > call cleaner (maybe through dbus to baloo_file?) > connect cleaner done signal to resume indexing > > ? > > If so, that makes a lot of sense to me...we can get rid of restartCleaner > as well. > > Vishesh Handa wrote: > Yup. We can either do it in baloo_file or even create a separate process > which the KCM just spawns when the configuration changes. > > Simeon Bird wrote: > Ok - I'll remove the IndexCleaner hooks in the IndexScheduler and rebase > both these review sets on top of that.
Please don't go into so much effort. Just push these patches. And then if you want you can work on removing the IndexCleaner. - Vishesh ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114983/#review47256 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 12, 2014, 3:43 p.m., Simeon Bird wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114983/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 12, 2014, 3:43 p.m.) > > > Review request for Baloo and Vishesh Handa. > > > Repository: baloo > > > Description > ------- > > Misc. File queue changes - the top edit should perhaps be applied to > IndexScheduler::slotCommitted > as well. > > commit ea35771246890c46f63d30f765a0d19844bd3d63 > Author: Simeon Bird <bla...@gmail.com> > Date: Sat Jan 11 14:57:39 2014 -0500 > > Instead of unconditionally resuming the file queue when the basic queue > is done, call slotScheduleIndexing. > > Otherwise the file queue would start once the basic queue was done, even > on battery. > > commit b6aeea48286e53206726af48dc65da026c3dd7a8 > Author: Simeon Bird <bla...@gmail.com> > Date: Sat Jan 11 14:34:17 2014 -0500 > > Refactor a function in indexscheduler.cpp to reduce duplication > > commit 4aa06719a98f740fb55c51232ac306409a860077 > Author: Simeon Bird <bla...@gmail.com> > Date: Sat Jan 11 14:21:18 2014 -0500 > > Do not call fillQueue when the file queue is created, but when the basic > queue is done. > > We only know what work needs to be done in the file queue once the basic > queue is complete, so call fillQueue at that time, not when the queue is > created. > > Before we could be filling the file queue pointlessly with > tasks to be cleaned, or, if the file queue was empty when > the basic queue started, it might not start when it should have done. > > commit 406a6a4ae4f5facbb33b7de433347d84f77182c5 > Author: Simeon Bird <bla...@gmail.com> > Date: Sat Jan 11 12:44:52 2014 -0500 > > FileIndexingQueue doesn't need to listen to ConfigChanged to refill the > indexing queue, because that is handled in the IndexScheduler already > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/file/fileindexingqueue.h c112c97 > src/file/fileindexingqueue.cpp 0f22caf > src/file/indexscheduler.h 015d23a > src/file/indexscheduler.cpp 79cd5bf > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114983/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Compiled, ran with it. > > > Thanks, > > Simeon Bird > >
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
