On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 17:49 +0100, Lukas Zeller wrote: > On Jul 28, 2009, at 16:48 , Patrick Ohly wrote: > > > Anyway, currently in SyncEvolution the performance difference isn't > > that > > large, so let's focus on the other aspect: the statistics are not > > incremented even if the engine does the deleting one-by-one. > > Ok, I didn't look up that one myself in the implementation before > replying, sorry. > > But thinking of it, I believe I did it this way intentionally. It very > much depends on point of view you have for the "deleted" count. For > myself, I prefer seeing only deletes issued from the remote side, and > I consider cleaning out the local DB before "reloading" the data not > as real part-of-sync delete operations. Of course, YMMV.
Indeed. For me, the numbers in the statistics must add up: "items before sync" + "items added" + "items deleted" = "items after sync" ;-) It's a bit hard to tell what the users expect, but as we really present all these numbers (including the item counts) I think a mathematically correct interpretation makes more sense. > > Is this something that can or should be changed? > > Can certainly, should - IMHO for a generic sync engine it might make > sense to add an *option* to add these to the count. Fair enough. But I can also fix the statistics inside SyncEvolution. Let me have a look at that first, before you spend any more time of your vacation answering emails or worse, coding! -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ os-libsynthesis mailing list [email protected] http://lists.synthesis.ch/mailman/listinfo/os-libsynthesis
