Am Dienstag, den 15.03.2011, 09:33 +0200 schrieb Adrien Bustany: > On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:10:18 +0100, Ville M. Vainio wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Patrick Ohly > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I've said before and I say it again here, I consider performance > >> comparisons pointless at this time. > > > > Considering that e-d-s has a much more modest feature set than > > tracker > > (tracker in general being a much more ambitious project), I would > > have > > expected it to to trounce tracker in performance, which doesn't seem > > to be the case. > > > > This evidence might prompt to re-evaluate this part of the > > architectural plans. Or at least leave the door open to transitioning > > back to tracker when it's feasible. > > If you're interested in the saving performance of both solutions, I > answered the thread on the Tracker ML (didn't want to cross-spam > Meego-Dev). If you abstract the fact that EDS has no batching API (and > therefore seems to issue a fsync after saving each contact) by running > it over libeatmydata, EDS is approximately twice faster than > qtcontacts-tracker (though that area is being optimized currently). I > haven't done any contact fetching benchmarks.
Could you post an archive link here for convenience? Thank you, Mathias -- Mathias Hasselmann <[email protected]> http://openismus.com/ _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
