Hey Boudhayan, It's nice that you are stepping up for maintaining baloo. I have no objections to that and will try to help you out whenever needed :)
Cheers, Pinak -- Thanks Pinak Ahuja On 11 September 2016 at 19:40, Boudhayan Gupta <bgu...@kde.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On 11 September 2016 at 22:59, Christoph Cullmann <cullm...@absint.com> > wrote: > > I think the main issue is: There is no need to reproduce them, it is > clear, that baloo will crash > > on any problem with lmdb, as "no" errors are handled (or lets say 99% of > the errors are not handled). > > > > The code is full of Q_ASSERT, but no handling of the return codes beside > that. > > Oh, it gets worse. Q_ASSERTs compile to nothing in release mode so you > don't even have meaningful crashes on those asserts, things just > mysteriously fail elsewhere. I spent a whole bunch of time coding in > actual checks after those asserts because Dolphin would crash when > selecting multiple files with Baloo disabled, and other such magical > bugs. > > > Actually, I think, in most cases the code shall just catch the error > cases and do nothing (or purge data > > until all is fine again) but not like now: crash or assert. > > > > That is not acceptable for something that runs per default ;=) > > > > Just looking at the code, you see things like: > > > > 1) Baloo::Database: needs a mutex, as many threads might call ::open > (e.g. in krunner) => corruption, dead > > > > 2) inproper cleanup: I doubt one can mdb_txn_abort(txn); if already > mdb_txn_begin(...) failed > > > > 3) needs everywhere return code checks, e.g. in PostingList > PostingDB::get(const QByteArray& term), we have > > tons of bugs about random crashs afterwards: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=367480 > > > > 4) 32-bit systems supported at all? ATM, after 1GB of indexing, that was > it, no more baloo or any other application > > calling any of the accessors of e.g. Query (if you have bad luck). > > If you have the time to fix those things you've listed above, awesome > - I'd love to look at the RRs. Lessens my workload. > > Otherwise I'll look at this on the weekends when I have no sysadmin > things to do. > > > > >> > >>> Beside that, could we get some baloo-b...@kde.org list as default > assignee > >>> for all baloo bugs instead of "one" person? > >> > >> If we're going to do it this way, why not just make it the default > >> frameworks mailing list, or the frameworks bugs list if there is one? > > I am not sure, if that will make people happy ;=) > > Let's get other people involved, too ;-) > > Thanks, > Boudhayan >
