nepomuk
Hi, is there an applet oa a widget or something for use nepomuk server?
in system setting i started the daemon but i don't know where i can make a search kubuntu jaunty kde 4.2 thanks Francesco -- -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
2009/2/24 francesco@promotux.it <francesco@promotux.it>:
> Hi, is there an applet oa a widget or something for use nepomuk server? > in system setting i started the daemon but i don't know where i can make > a search > > kubuntu jaunty *kde 4.2 > > thanks > > Francesco I'm looking for an answer to this to as for now I have deactivate strigi and nepomuk as I don't see a use for it. Strigi is suppose to be a desktop search engine but without the tools search for anything what use is it then? In Gwenview there are some references and Dolphine (i think) that you can use Nepomuke to add tags, komments and rating to files but I have not tested it. For tagging my photos i use Digikam as it will store the tags as metadata in the files. / Jonas -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
Just what good is nepomuk and how come it eats up a fair percentage of
CPU, according to top, at around 10%? Will my addressbook blow up without it? Can it be removed? I couldn't care LESS about some process continually strolling around my file system looking to categorize things. My brain suffices to keep track of my music. I'd really like to blow it off. Ric -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
On Wednesday, June 16, 2010 01:18:16 pm Ric Moore wrote:
> Just what good is nepomuk and how come it eats up a fair percentage of > CPU, according to top, at around 10%? Will my addressbook blow up > without it? Can it be removed? I couldn't care LESS about some process > continually strolling around my file system looking to categorize > things. My brain suffices to keep track of my music. I'd really like to > blow it off. Ric If you rely a LOT on desktop search, tagging files and folders/pictures, then nepomuk is quite good, but it can take a fair bit to index everything initially. It does shut off automatically if resources are too low. But searches are quite fast. Address book has nothing to do with desktop search. If you don't want Nepomuk (tagging, categorizing) and/or Strigi (the file indexing) you can disable them very easily in System Settings Clay -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
Clay Weber said the following at 06/16/2010 11:37 AM :
> > If you rely a LOT on desktop search, tagging files and folders/pictures, > then nepomuk is quite good, but it can take a fair bit to index everything > initially. It does shut off automatically if resources are too low. But > searches are quite fast. > How long is it likely to keep running following an upgrade? (Yeah, silly question because it probably depends on all kinds of imponderables, but what have other users experienced?) I seem to recall that it ran for a couple of hours when I moved to karmic. I upgraded to lucid two days ago, and all four cores are pretty solidly in use still, and the disk light is still on almost continuously. The (lack of) responsiveness of the desktop is truly abysmal, so I'm wondering how much longer this is likely to go on. I don't like to remove something that KDE seems to expect to be running, but when it takes 30 seconds just to start a program because the system is so bogged down, that seems to me have passed the bounds of reasonable behaviour, so if this is likely to continue much longer, I guess I'll be switching off nepomuk, even though I very much like the idea of a desktop search that actually works. Doc -- Web: http://www.sff.net/people/N7DR -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
On Wednesday, June 16, 2010 03:20:51 pm D. R. Evans wrote:
> Clay Weber said the following at 06/16/2010 11:37 AM : > > If you rely a LOT on desktop search, tagging files and folders/pictures, > > then nepomuk is quite good, but it can take a fair bit to index > > everything initially. It does shut off automatically if resources are > > too low. But searches are quite fast. > > How long is it likely to keep running following an upgrade? (Yeah, silly > question because it probably depends on all kinds of imponderables, but > what have other users experienced?) > > I seem to recall that it ran for a couple of hours when I moved to karmic. > I upgraded to lucid two days ago, and all four cores are pretty solidly in > use still, and the disk light is still on almost continuously. The (lack > of) responsiveness of the desktop is truly abysmal, so I'm wondering how > much longer this is likely to go on. > > I don't like to remove something that KDE seems to expect to be running, > but when it takes 30 seconds just to start a program because the system is > so bogged down, that seems to me have passed the bounds of reasonable > behaviour, so if this is likely to continue much longer, I guess I'll be > switching off nepomuk, even though I very much like the idea of a desktop > search that actually works. > > Doc Don't remove it, just shut it off. You won't loose any functionality really, unless you use desktop searches (which include file *contents* as well), regular searches fork fine without it. you can also tell it which folders to index, usually it is set to index your entire /home folder, which could include email, photos, docs, music, etc. I don't know how long it takes to finish as it depends on how much it has to index. On my old laptop it doesn't have much to index, but it does slow things down so I usually turn it off. Even so, it never ran constantly after the first run, however. It does bog my 2.0 pentium 4 and 1gb ram down once in a while, though. I have not looked at how much it sucks up , though. I have a fresh install here, so i will see how it goes Clay -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
Clay Weber said the following at 06/16/2010 04:39 PM :
> > Don't remove it, just shut it off. You won't loose any functionality really, > unless you use desktop searches (which include file *contents* as well), > regular searches fork fine without it. Well I would really like to have a usable desktop search, so I don't mind putting up with a bit of initial pain. I think I'll give it until tomorrow morning. If it's still consuming everything then, I'll switch it off. I guess the nepomuk in lucid must be very different from the one in karmic, since it seems to be re-indexing so much. But that's not a bad thing, since desktop search in karmic was, unfortunately, laughable (if one was in a laughing mood, which I admit I rarely was when desktop search returned no hits for items that I knew existed -- or, worse, a random subset of files with hits). I have some hope that after all this work, the result will be a desktop search system that is useful. I have it set up to index everything under ~, which comes to ~500GB of data in about 1,000,000 files. That seems reaonable to me, but maybe I have a different idea of reasonableness from the KDE developers. I don't think I'd find it so annoying if nepomuk figured out that it was consuming the machine and throttled itself back. I suppose I could force it to do so myself with nice and ionice, but really a user shouldn't have to be fiddling with changing the priority of daemons. Doc -- Web: http://www.sff.net/people/N7DR -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
On 17/06/2010 02:04, D. R. Evans wrote:
> Clay Weber said the following at 06/16/2010 04:39 PM : > >> >> Don't remove it, just shut it off. You won't loose any functionality really, >> unless you use desktop searches (which include file *contents* as well), >> regular searches fork fine without it. > > Well I would really like to have a usable desktop search, so I don't mind > putting up with a bit of initial pain. I think I'll give it until tomorrow > morning. If it's still consuming everything then, I'll switch it off. > > I guess the nepomuk in lucid must be very different from the one in karmic, > since it seems to be re-indexing so much. But that's not a bad thing, since > desktop search in karmic was, unfortunately, laughable (if one was in a > laughing mood, which I admit I rarely was when desktop search returned no > hits for items that I knew existed -- or, worse, a random subset of files > with hits). I have some hope that after all this work, the result will be a > desktop search system that is useful. > > I have it set up to index everything under ~, which comes to ~500GB of data > in about 1,000,000 files. That seems reaonable to me, but maybe I have a > different idea of reasonableness from the KDE developers. > > I don't think I'd find it so annoying if nepomuk figured out that it was > consuming the machine and throttled itself back. I suppose I could force it > to do so myself with nice and ionice, but really a user shouldn't have to > be fiddling with changing the priority of daemons. With a disc sufficiently much smaller than yours Strigi/Nepomuk is still indexing a week down the line - however this laptop stays switched off during nights (hmmm should perhaps leave it on to finalise?). I have around 85 GB of data and have "unticked" nepomuk on about 10 of those Sinclair -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
O. Sinclair said the following at 06/17/2010 01:32 AM :
> > With a disc sufficiently much smaller than yours Strigi/Nepomuk is still > indexing a week down the line - however this laptop stays switched off > during nights (hmmm should perhaps leave it on to finalise?). I have > around 85 GB of data and have "unticked" nepomuk on about 10 of those > Thank you for that information. It was still consuming everything this morning, 2½ days after the upgrade, so I've turned it off. Maybe I'll just run it at night for however long it takes. It sure seems like the indexing daemon needs some work so that it isn't so intrusive (and it would be nice if it was a lot faster, but I can see that maybe that's not possible). Doc -- Web: http://www.sff.net/people/N7DR -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
nepomuk
On 06/17/2010 06:27 PM, D. R. Evans wrote:
> O. Sinclair said the following at 06/17/2010 01:32 AM : > >> >> With a disc sufficiently much smaller than yours Strigi/Nepomuk is still >> indexing a week down the line - however this laptop stays switched off >> during nights (hmmm should perhaps leave it on to finalise?). I have >> around 85 GB of data and have "unticked" nepomuk on about 10 of those >> > > Thank you for that information. > > It was still consuming everything this morning, 2½ days after the upgrade, > so I've turned it off. > > Maybe I'll just run it at night for however long it takes. It sure seems > like the indexing daemon needs some work so that it isn't so intrusive (and > it would be nice if it was a lot faster, but I can see that maybe that's > not possible). > > Doc > > If you go to System Settings > Advanced > Desktop Search > Advanced Settings you can assign more memory to NeoPunk so that it have a better performance. Nigel -- kubuntu-users mailing list kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:42 AM. |
VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.