FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian KDE

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-08-2010, 09:11 PM
Martin Steigerwald
 
Default Desktop search: should background processes be (io)niced?

Am Montag 08 März 2010 schrieb Michael Schuerig:
> I'm trying to take advantage of the newly usable desktop search feature
> and have selected several GBs of documents for indexing. The drawback
> is that the various processes associated with this task --
> nepomukservices, virtuoso-t -- chew heavily on the CPU and slurp away
> I/O bandwidth.
>
> I noticed one nepomukservices process that is running at nice level 19,
> all other related processes apparently have nice level 0. I don't know
> if there is any ionice-ing done at all. Shouldn't all these processes
> be running in such a way as to yield CPU and I/O bandwidth to other
> processes?

You can look for yourself with iotop. I think I saw some ionicing for
nepomuk processes. I disabled Nepomuk Strigi indexing for now cause it
crashes inside mail dir (see my mail "nepomukservices processes seems to
crash on certain director" on this list.

--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
 
Old 03-08-2010, 10:46 PM
Michael Schuerig
 
Default Desktop search: should background processes be (io)niced?

On Monday 08 March 2010, Valerio Passini wrote:
> Alle lunedì 08 marzo 2010, Michael Schuerig ha scritto:
> > I'm trying to take advantage of the newly usable desktop search
> > feature and have selected several GBs of documents for indexing.
> > The drawback is that the various processes associated with this
> > task -- nepomukservices, virtuoso-t -- chew heavily on the CPU and
> > slurp away I/O bandwidth.
> >
> > I noticed one nepomukservices process that is running at nice level
> > 19, all other related processes apparently have nice level 0. I
> > don't know if there is any ionice-ing done at all. Shouldn't all
> > these processes be running in such a way as to yield CPU and I/O
> > bandwidth to other processes?

> I was as willing as you to try it, but there is problem with strigi
> starting indexing the same stuff over and over again. See bug:
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=226895
> In theory the desktop search engine should eat much CPU only once, at
> the beginning, when the index must be built from zero. When this
> process is completed, only newer files need to be indexed and the
> CPU usage is comparably lower. If you don't meet that bug, you
> probably should be happy with nepomuk.

I'm not convinced this is a real bug. From what I can tell, strigi does
not index in depth-first order. In my case, I have >> 100.000 files that
I'd like to have indexed (if that's really sensible, I'll decide later)
and I'm prepared for it to take some time. But still I don't think
indexing should hog my computer the way it does.

Michael

--
Michael Schuerig
mailto:michael@schuerig.de
http://www.schuerig.de/michael/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201003090046.44902.michael@schuerig.de">http://lists.debian.org/201003090046.44902.michael@schuerig.de
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:12 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org