-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Pete Connolly wrote: > On Monday 17 December 2007 16:47:31 Adam Jimerson wrote: >> On Monday 17 December 2007 08:37:56 am Kevin Dupuy wrote: >>> Furthermore, as I mentioned on the "other" thread, I'm trying to figure >>> out why Beagle takes up so much CPU and memory in some people's >>> computers >> I have no problem with beagle, and I find it a nice way to graphically >> search for things that I have misplaced. The only time I have trouble with >> it taking up a lot of my system is during the first run on a clean install, >> after that it waits until midnight to update its index on my desktop, which >> has a Intel Cereron D 3.33 Ghz processor and 512 MB ram 2 gig swap. > > I'm also confused about the reported problems with Beagle. I'm using KDE with > the Kerry search front end and it has zero impact on my PC use, but adds a > lot of value when looking for many types of data. Emails from two years ago? > Yep, I can find them in seconds. Contracts in OOo format, spreadsheets, > instant messenger exchanges in Kopete - I can search them all in an instant > with Kerry and Beagle. > > I can see how it could hog CPU with malformed files, initial searching of the > disk (anyone tried Google desktop search? That doesn't take CPU time, but > does things very, very slowly) and maybe when you've added a huge amount of > indexable data in a single day, but it honestly doesn't impact my work, > rather it adds to my productivity. > > While some user's setups might not be optimal for Beagle, I think there are a > lot of people that like it, just like me. > > I think maybe my setup is what the problem is, I have Thunderbird with about 2Gigs of EMail including Server logs that I receive every morning, and some huge software lists. These messages are stored in huge MBox files, that are updated every 5 minutes when my machine Pops the server, but .. I have a dual core 64bit Turion L52 with 1.5 Gigs of memory and a 7200 RPM SATA disk. I was told that the Thunderbird plugin is not quite optimal yet, but, darn it, that's a lot of CPU and Memory as well as a good disk, performance should be better. Sorry, if it can't work well on that hardware, it shouldn't be in production. As someone else said, this is Linux not Windows, we are known for lean and mean software, this is just unacceptable, lets put performance before features! Gary B -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHZvLS5BLKxPqBKDURAirwAJ9pQHhrEypa2AXWZn8dW+AflAX8gQCfTnel 7U97Ase9MHhy0/ujg9EB+pQ= =t9i8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
