Re: [Evolution] About performance
Thank you Matthew. This aleviated a little bit the situation. But not much. I still see something wrong. I have to investigate where the problems come from... One known issue, especially for heavy users, is that fragmentation can build up in the mail summary database over time, which does negatively impact performance. If you notice your hard disk grinding a lot while working in Evolution, this might be the issue. It might help to garbage collect the database. Evolution does not currently do that itself. Try shutting down Evolution and run this little shell script: http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/evolution-rebuild-summarydb Eventually I'd like to tie this into the Expunge operation, which seems like a natural place for it to get run periodically. Haven't done it yet because, you know, time, manpower, priorities, etc. Matthew Barnes ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Hi Pete, Yes, I know that if I'm the only one reporting this it's surely a client/user misconfiguration. That's what I wanted to know before opening a bug. But you cannot blame ubuntu or any other distribution for this. The only reason that may affect performance in my setup is a lot of small things together: 1.- Big data folders in evolution. 2.- RAID setup on my home disk that's not optimal. In efect, I have to change it because it's really slow. That's because I did the raid with the BIOS support what's is an error. I know. 3.- Database handling in evo not optimal. 4.- memory leaks? I want to setup right the point 2 but I want it to stay slow for a while to be sure it's not a matter of just put faster hardware. If thunderbird goes slow after a year I will write again and say: Hey, people, that was a normal issue because big folders and slow disks. But I don't think this will be the issue. Anyway. Let's close this thread if nobody saw evolution go slower on time. Maybe it's only me. Thank you a lot for your support! Best reagards, El 13/05/13 11:05, Pete Biggs escribió: But man this is kind of the same problem of the known kernel IO problem that also I reported and nobody not much people trust just because they didn't see any problem. Because one person reporting problems is not usually credible - it's indicative of a misconfiguration or an issue elsewhere. Yes, it sometimes is a problem, and given an infinite amount of resources all such things would be investigated - but with limited (very limited) resources, the developers have to concentrate on the things that have the most impact for the most people. The same occurs in evolution. Just because it works well for you it does not mean it's working well. I can tell you that performance and usability degraded over time. but not for most people. My experience is that Evolution has become more stable and more usable over the last few releases. And yes, it has become faster and more responsive. To be honest most of the grouching about the stability and speed of Evo seems to be coming from Ubuntu users - that may be because there are just more users of Ubuntu than other distros; or it could be something that the Ubuntu packagers have done to Evo; or it could be some interaction of Evo with other libraries that Ubuntu have modified. That's not to say that there aren't reported problems with other distros, but they don't seem to make Evo unusable like it reportedly does on Ubuntu. If I'm taking my time explaining what's the problem I suppose that someone should take some time in investigating what can be wrong. It's not a waste of time because doing it will improve overall usabiliy of all users. I'm not blaming. I'm just warning about a problem that made me switch. Hope you understand that I love the program and that's why I'm telling. That's not blaming. Please take time to analyze what I'm telling. I suppose that I'm not the only one that suffered of this. Have you filed bug reports in bugzilla about it? That's the only way that it's going to get into the developers list of things to look at - the more people that file bugs, especially if they turn out to be the same problem, the more likely that it will be looked at. Note: My current version is: 3.6.4. And crashed while writing this on Thunderbird. So I didn't touched anything when crashed. If it crashes while doing nothing, then you really need to get a backtrace on it with all the symbol packages installed so that someone can see exactly where and why it is crashing. Useful information on doing this is at http://projects.gnome.org/evolution/bugs.shtml I suppose it's a small bug. But this is not the problem. Problem is performance. File bugs about it. That's the only way the developers can get a view on systemic problems and can spot patterns. It's also very helpful if when you do submit a bug following a posting to this list, that you tell us the bug ID - at least then if some one searches the list archives (because we ALL do that before posting, don't we) they can at least see if the problem has been fixed, or can add a comment to the bug. Finally, the developers make advances and improvements and bug fixes in the current version and only bug fixes in the previous version - so it is always worthwhile running the most up to date version before criticizing things too much. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
To be honest most of the grouching about the stability and speed of Evo seems to be coming from Ubuntu users Or people with *unbelievably* ancient versions. Every time I see someone complaining about 2.32 or even 2.28... my jaw drops. I just don't get it - why do that to yourself? As others have said, these are the versions on current *supported* distros. Specifically RHEL 5 (and consequently CentOS 5, Scientific Linux 5 etc.) is on Evolution version 2.12.3; RHEL 6 (and clones) is on 2.28.3. The whole point of RHEL is stability, not cutting edge, consequently they stick to versions of software that are consistent and they back port bug fixes where appropriate. To be honest I've never had any complaints from my users about the instability or speed of Evolution on CentOS 5 or 6 (but that may be more to do with my users!). BTW, the use of 2.32.x versions is because that's the last version before Gnome 3 came out - so those distros that don't like Gnome 3 (and I've never understood why) use Gnome 2.32 and hence that version of Evolution. What worries me is not the use of old (and distro supported) versions, it's the experience of users with current versions on some distros that don't match with the experience of users elsewhere. Bad packaging of an application on something like Ubuntu, because it is so popular, reflects very badly on that application as a whole. It is how myths about software start - it becomes received wisdom that, say, Evolution is slow and buggy because 50% of all Linux users tried to use it on Ubuntu/Mint and gave up and switched to Thunderbird; 3 years down the line the mantra that Evolution is crap will still be repeated time and again on user forums. I don't know what can be done about it. Certainly with Ubuntu there's no point - they have already decided that Thunderbird is their supported MUA, so there isn't going to be much official appetite for improving the user experience of Evolution. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Freitag, den 17.05.2013, 09:29 +0100 schrieb Pete Biggs: To be honest most of the grouching about the stability and speed of Evo seems to be coming from Ubuntu users Or people with *unbelievably* ancient versions. Every time I see someone complaining about 2.32 or even 2.28... my jaw drops. I just don't get it - why do that to yourself? As others have said, these are the versions on current *supported* distros. Specifically RHEL 5 (and consequently CentOS 5, Scientific Linux 5 etc.) is on Evolution version 2.12.3; RHEL 6 (and clones) is on 2.28.3. The whole point of RHEL is stability, not cutting edge, consequently they stick to versions of software that are consistent and they back port bug fixes where appropriate. To be honest I've never had any complaints from my users about the instability or speed of Evolution on CentOS 5 or 6 (but that may be more to do with my users!). BTW, the use of 2.32.x versions is because that's the last version before Gnome 3 came out - so those distros that don't like Gnome 3 (and I've never understood why) ^^ galore users wouldn't like gnome3 ??? I do ! -- Thomas Prost thomas.pr...@prosts.info ProstsInfo ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 11:13 +0200, Thomas Prost wrote: ^^ galore users wouldn't like gnome3 ??? Or not, 'the Internet' has a powerful negative bias. The unhappy are far more motivated to post than the happy. I find lots of very happy users - but they aren't going to post/blob about the fact that they are happy with a tool and using it to get work done. I do ! As do I; I've found it to be stable, fast, and efficient. I use in on multiple large displays all day running multiple apps - and it really zips along. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Freitag, den 17.05.2013, 06:08 -0400 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams: On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 11:13 +0200, Thomas Prost wrote: ^^ galore users wouldn't like gnome3 ??? Or not, 'the Internet' has a powerful negative bias. The unhappy are far more motivated to post than the happy. I find lots of very happy users - but they aren't going to post/blob about the fact that they are happy with a tool and using it to get work done. ++true, but I didn't say anything about this spreading, for I don't know either. I do ! As do I; I've found it to be stable, fast, and efficient. I use in on multiple large displays all day running multiple apps - and it really zips along. I don't have eyes enough to grip all those zipping on a gnome3 screen, because I'm an old manre. I like my desktop elements calmly residing where I put them once ;-) -- Thomas Prost thomas.pr...@prosts.info ProstsInfo ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Hi :) I think you can tell when people are extremely happy because they join this list to lurk and find new interesting things. When they are even happier or just know enough then they start helping people. Also Friends argue. Enemies don't care. There might be 1 or 2 things that really bug you but not enough to drive you away. That doesn't make those 1 or 2 things any less annoying. Regards from Tom :)___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 17:14 +0100, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) I think you can tell when people are extremely happy because they join this list to lurk and find new interesting things. When they are even happier or just know enough then they start helping people. Also Friends argue. Enemies don't care. There might be 1 or 2 things that really bug you but not enough to drive you away. That doesn't make those 1 or 2 things any less annoying. Regards from Tom :) +1 FWIW on other mailing list I claimed several times that in the future I'll use another MUA. I had absolutely serious issues, on one Linux install Evo was completely unusable. I still have tons of annoying issues. On different Linux, with different versions, all 3.x. I'll stay with Evo and stay subscribed to this list and will report those issues in the future, I don't have the time to care about Evo now and only subscribed to the list, since I installed it for Windows, were I have to test hardware, that isn't good supported for Linux. On Windows Evo is a PITA, however, I'm not a Win user and never ever will become one. A last note, I dropped GNOME, when there was the switch from 2 to 3 ;). I'm running Xfce on all of my Linux and FreeBSD, but even there I avoid some evil GNOME things, such as gvfs. gvfs is only good to kill USB drives that fulfill EU regulations and I dislike several GNOME things. When Evo is working, it's an excellent MUA. 2 Cents, Ralf ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Montag, den 13.05.2013, 08:30 -0400 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams: On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 10:05 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote: But man this is kind of the same problem of the known kernel IO problem that also I reported and nobody not much people trust just because they didn't see any problem. Because one person reporting problems is not usually credible - it's indicative of a misconfiguration or an issue elsewhere. Yes, it sometimes is a problem, and given an infinite amount of resources all such things would be investigated - but with limited (very limited) resources, the developers have to concentrate on the things that have the most impact for the most people. AND, it is important to note, that LINUX [and related applications] is used very successfully in a myriad of situations by a whole lot of people. Most low-level bugs at this point in time are extremely narrow, it is unreasonable to expect the world to jump on them when they harm 0.0001% of the universe. The same occurs in evolution. Just because it works well for you it does not mean it's working well. I can tell you that performance and usability degraded over time. but not for most people. My experience is that Evolution has become more stable and more usable over the last few releases. And yes, it has become faster and more responsive. Exactly, it has gotten faster and MUCH more stable. Some component may have broken, or something degraded, but Evolution has done neither. To be honest most of the grouching about the stability and speed of Evo seems to be coming from Ubuntu users Or people with *unbelievably* ancient versions. Every time I see someone complaining about 2.32 or even 2.28... my jaw drops. I just don't get it - why do that to yourself? 'coz it runs and does all I expect from it ! ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Montag, den 13.05.2013, 08:30 -0400 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams: trimmed Or people with *unbelievably* ancient versions. Every time I see someone complaining about 2.32 or even 2.28... my jaw drops. I just don't get it - why do that to yourself? 'coz it runs and does all I expect from it ! Because those are the versions supplied by RedHat, who provide paid support for people like me who don't want to fight bugs at the cutting edge. And as you well know, it is virtually impossible to update just evolution in an earlier gnome environment. I long ago gave up trying. George Reeke ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 13:54 -0400, Mark Filipak wrote: On 2013/5/13 8:30 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: Yes. 3.6.x is a major release back. 3.8.x *does* fix some performance issues, especially related to flaky connections. Or it certainly seems that way to me. I'm new to Linux, Adam, so please excuse my ignorance. In my Linux virtual machine I'm running Evolution version 3.6.2 and I've experienced sudden crashes at start-up while idle (not doing anything). If you run the evolution command from the command line [gnome-terminal] you may see text error messages upon the uninitiated exit, they may be illuminating as to the reason. But I did see such behavior *rarely* in some versions of 3.6.x This is generally true for UNIX apps; run them from the command line to see stdout/stderr messags if you feel that something is amiss. Evo 3.6.2 is what my Software Manager fetched when I selected to install Evolution. How does a linux-person get and, especially, install the latest version? (Simply pointing me to a web site is fine.) Packaging is always a distribution specific issue. For openSUSE, for example, there are repositories one can subscribe[via zypper] and update to for the 'latest' versions of software. That means someone has to package it - but for mainstream software like GNOME that is almost certainly being done by someone. http://dominique.leuenberger.net/blog/2013/04/gnome-3-8-for-opensuse-12-3-go-get-it/ So it will depend on what distribution you are using, and will probably only be available to sit on top of the latest release of that distro. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
El 09/05/13 02:31, N B Day escribió: On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 21:58 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 19:51 +0200, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I was a high evangelist of evolution but right now it has not the quality it used to have. Please add in Ubuntu to your statements as you chose to use a distribution that deliberately ships old versions and doesn't provide upstream bugfix updates to their users. Just to get the facts straight who to blame for missing quality. andre This was true in the past but not now. Ubuntu 13.04, which was released in late April and is based on Gnome 3.6, provides Evolution 3.6.4, released 6 March 2013. Six or seven weeks later: pretty up-to-date. If you like Ubuntu and must have the 3.8 series you can go with Ubuntu Gnome and update to Gnome 3.8; same as with openSUSE. Now that Ubuntu is a sorta-kinda rolling release, I expect more up-to-date versions of everything to appear. +1 Evolution is no longer the default MUA in Ubuntu, but it still integrates nicely with their version of the Gnome calendar. Works very well for me and my extended family. +1 Glad to see that at least developers use and test evolution in a day to day basis. But man this is kind of the same problem of the known kernel IO problem that also I reported and nobody not much people trust just because they didn't see any problem. When the kernel IO problem was noticeable for all the people it was way too late to find a solution. The same occurs in evolution. Just because it works well for you it does not mean it's working well. I can tell you that performance and usability degraded over time. Yes. It's a great e-mail client. One of the best. It supported even MS Exchange when no others did it. It supported IMAP as well. It has great plugins that made live easier and it used to work really well. But performance problems right now are a serious issue. If this were my product I will start profiling it. Just to see how fast/slow is and how can we improve. I can say that I'm heavy user. I used to have thousands of e-mails in 6 different IMAP accounts, and a lot of filters that classifies my e-mail in local folder when neccesary. Well... Once the e-mail is classified it should not slow evolution. So I suppose this is not the problem. So why the program is getting slower. If I'm taking my time explaining what's the problem I suppose that someone should take some time in investigating what can be wrong. It's not a waste of time because doing it will improve overall usabiliy of all users. I'm not blaming. I'm just warning about a problem that made me switch. Hope you understand that I love the program and that's why I'm telling. That's not blaming. Please take time to analyze what I'm telling. I suppose that I'm not the only one that suffered of this. Note: My current version is: 3.6.4. And crashed while writing this on Thunderbird. So I didn't touched anything when crashed. I suppose it's a small bug. But this is not the problem. Problem is performance. Thank you for reading. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
But man this is kind of the same problem of the known kernel IO problem that also I reported and nobody not much people trust just because they didn't see any problem. Because one person reporting problems is not usually credible - it's indicative of a misconfiguration or an issue elsewhere. Yes, it sometimes is a problem, and given an infinite amount of resources all such things would be investigated - but with limited (very limited) resources, the developers have to concentrate on the things that have the most impact for the most people. The same occurs in evolution. Just because it works well for you it does not mean it's working well. I can tell you that performance and usability degraded over time. but not for most people. My experience is that Evolution has become more stable and more usable over the last few releases. And yes, it has become faster and more responsive. To be honest most of the grouching about the stability and speed of Evo seems to be coming from Ubuntu users - that may be because there are just more users of Ubuntu than other distros; or it could be something that the Ubuntu packagers have done to Evo; or it could be some interaction of Evo with other libraries that Ubuntu have modified. That's not to say that there aren't reported problems with other distros, but they don't seem to make Evo unusable like it reportedly does on Ubuntu. If I'm taking my time explaining what's the problem I suppose that someone should take some time in investigating what can be wrong. It's not a waste of time because doing it will improve overall usabiliy of all users. I'm not blaming. I'm just warning about a problem that made me switch. Hope you understand that I love the program and that's why I'm telling. That's not blaming. Please take time to analyze what I'm telling. I suppose that I'm not the only one that suffered of this. Have you filed bug reports in bugzilla about it? That's the only way that it's going to get into the developers list of things to look at - the more people that file bugs, especially if they turn out to be the same problem, the more likely that it will be looked at. Note: My current version is: 3.6.4. And crashed while writing this on Thunderbird. So I didn't touched anything when crashed. If it crashes while doing nothing, then you really need to get a backtrace on it with all the symbol packages installed so that someone can see exactly where and why it is crashing. Useful information on doing this is at http://projects.gnome.org/evolution/bugs.shtml I suppose it's a small bug. But this is not the problem. Problem is performance. File bugs about it. That's the only way the developers can get a view on systemic problems and can spot patterns. It's also very helpful if when you do submit a bug following a posting to this list, that you tell us the bug ID - at least then if some one searches the list archives (because we ALL do that before posting, don't we) they can at least see if the problem has been fixed, or can add a comment to the bug. Finally, the developers make advances and improvements and bug fixes in the current version and only bug fixes in the previous version - so it is always worthwhile running the most up to date version before criticizing things too much. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 10:05 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote: But man this is kind of the same problem of the known kernel IO problem that also I reported and nobody not much people trust just because they didn't see any problem. Because one person reporting problems is not usually credible - it's indicative of a misconfiguration or an issue elsewhere. Yes, it sometimes is a problem, and given an infinite amount of resources all such things would be investigated - but with limited (very limited) resources, the developers have to concentrate on the things that have the most impact for the most people. AND, it is important to note, that LINUX [and related applications] is used very successfully in a myriad of situations by a whole lot of people. Most low-level bugs at this point in time are extremely narrow, it is unreasonable to expect the world to jump on them when they harm 0.0001% of the universe. The same occurs in evolution. Just because it works well for you it does not mean it's working well. I can tell you that performance and usability degraded over time. but not for most people. My experience is that Evolution has become more stable and more usable over the last few releases. And yes, it has become faster and more responsive. Exactly, it has gotten faster and MUCH more stable. Some component may have broken, or something degraded, but Evolution has done neither. To be honest most of the grouching about the stability and speed of Evo seems to be coming from Ubuntu users Or people with *unbelievably* ancient versions. Every time I see someone complaining about 2.32 or even 2.28... my jaw drops. I just don't get it - why do that to yourself? - that may be because there are just more users of Ubuntu than other distros; or it could be something that the Ubuntu packagers have done to Evo; or it could be some interaction of Evo with other libraries that Ubuntu have modified. That's not to say that there aren't reported problems with other distros, but they don't seem to make Evo unusable like it reportedly does on Ubuntu. They [Ubuntu] have had some very lemony releases; so everyone gets to experience the long-tail of those versions. File bugs about it. That's the only way the developers can get a view on systemic problems and can spot patterns. And bugs do get fixed. My latest bug report was resolved in 48 hours. It's also very helpful if when you do submit a bug following a posting to this list, that you tell us the bug ID - at least then if some one searches the list archives (because we ALL do that before posting, don't we) they can at least see if the problem has been fixed, or can add a comment to the bug. And perhaps people on the list can follow the bug or add something to it. I've done that several times. Finally, the developers make advances and improvements and bug fixes in the current version and only bug fixes in the previous version - so it is always worthwhile running the most up to date version before criticizing things too much. Yes. 3.6.x is a major release back. 3.8.x *does* fix some performance issues, especially related to flaky connections. Or it certainly seems that way to me. -- Adam Tauno Williams mailto:awill...@whitemice.org GPG D95ED383 Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 14:31 +0200, Contacto wrote: But performance problems right now are a serious issue. If this were my product I will start profiling it. Just to see how fast/slow is and how can we improve. I can say that I'm heavy user. I used to have thousands of e-mails in 6 different IMAP accounts, and a lot of filters that classifies my e-mail in local folder when neccesary. One known issue, especially for heavy users, is that fragmentation can build up in the mail summary database over time, which does negatively impact performance. If you notice your hard disk grinding a lot while working in Evolution, this might be the issue. It might help to garbage collect the database. Evolution does not currently do that itself. Try shutting down Evolution and run this little shell script: http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/evolution-rebuild-summarydb Eventually I'd like to tie this into the Expunge operation, which seems like a natural place for it to get run periodically. Haven't done it yet because, you know, time, manpower, priorities, etc. Matthew Barnes ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On 2013/5/13 8:30 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 10:05 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote: But man this is kind of the same problem of the known kernel IO problem that also I reported and nobody not much people trust just because they didn't see any problem. Because one person reporting problems is not usually credible - it's indicative of a misconfiguration or an issue elsewhere. Yes, it sometimes is a problem, and given an infinite amount of resources all such things would be investigated - but with limited (very limited) resources, the developers have to concentrate on the things that have the most impact for the most people. AND, it is important to note, that LINUX [and related applications] is used very successfully in a myriad of situations by a whole lot of people. Most low-level bugs at this point in time are extremely narrow, it is unreasonable to expect the world to jump on them when they harm 0.0001% of the universe. The same occurs in evolution. Just because it works well for you it does not mean it's working well. I can tell you that performance and usability degraded over time. but not for most people. My experience is that Evolution has become more stable and more usable over the last few releases. And yes, it has become faster and more responsive. Exactly, it has gotten faster and MUCH more stable. Some component may have broken, or something degraded, but Evolution has done neither. To be honest most of the grouching about the stability and speed of Evo seems to be coming from Ubuntu users Or people with *unbelievably* ancient versions. Every time I see someone complaining about 2.32 or even 2.28... my jaw drops. I just don't get it - why do that to yourself? - that may be because there are just more users of Ubuntu than other distros; or it could be something that the Ubuntu packagers have done to Evo; or it could be some interaction of Evo with other libraries that Ubuntu have modified. That's not to say that there aren't reported problems with other distros, but they don't seem to make Evo unusable like it reportedly does on Ubuntu. They [Ubuntu] have had some very lemony releases; so everyone gets to experience the long-tail of those versions. File bugs about it. That's the only way the developers can get a view on systemic problems and can spot patterns. And bugs do get fixed. My latest bug report was resolved in 48 hours. It's also very helpful if when you do submit a bug following a posting to this list, that you tell us the bug ID - at least then if some one searches the list archives (because we ALL do that before posting, don't we) they can at least see if the problem has been fixed, or can add a comment to the bug. And perhaps people on the list can follow the bug or add something to it. I've done that several times. Finally, the developers make advances and improvements and bug fixes in the current version and only bug fixes in the previous version - so it is always worthwhile running the most up to date version before criticizing things too much. Yes. 3.6.x is a major release back. 3.8.x *does* fix some performance issues, especially related to flaky connections. Or it certainly seems that way to me. I'm new to Linux, Adam, so please excuse my ignorance. In my Linux virtual machine I'm running Evolution version 3.6.2 and I've experienced sudden crashes at start-up while idle (not doing anything). Evo 3.6.2 is what my Software Manager fetched when I selected to install Evolution. How does a linux-person get and, especially, install the latest version? (Simply pointing me to a web site is fine.) Thanks - Mark. -- VMware Player 5.0.2 Host: WinXP3, 32-bit Guest: Linux Mint 14, 64-bit + Xfce 4.10 ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 16:58 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 21:58 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 19:51 +0200, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: Last version of evolution constantly crashed for me (the one comes with ubuntu 13.04). Sent a pair of bug reports with launchpad but I cannot continue use the program with this high degree of problems. I was a high evangelist of evolution but right now it has not the quality it used to have. Please add in Ubuntu to your statements as you chose to use a distribution that deliberately ships old versions and doesn't provide upstream bugfix updates to their users. +1 Just to get the facts straight who to blame for missing quality. Yep, I'm on openSUSE 12.3 GNOME 3.8.1 and *YES* I use Evolution all day every day. It is stable. Add me as a long time openSUSE user that looked at all the options and chose Evolution for it's features. I stayed with openSUSE because it works. I stayed with Evolution because it works. When I do have a problem, almost always my fault, I always get a polite, thorough answer from this list. Bart ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Hello, Yes, I warned about this and disk problems some time ago. Now it's time to switch. Last version of evolution constantly crashed for me (the one comes with ubuntu 13.04). Sent a pair of bug reports with launchpad but I cannot continue use the program with this high degree of problems. I was a high evangelist of evolution but right now it has not the quality it used to have. Thunderbird seems to have progressed better and in a more robust way. It also handles sieve. I hope I can switch back to evolution when this kind of problems are solved. The most important one is performance because a mail client that is so slow is the worst of all usability problems. I have to say that all my friends also switched to Thunderbird and never looked back. Hope I can look back in near future because I used to love this application... (Evolution now!) Best regards, PS: I'm quite surprised to see that developers never saw the performance problem to come... Do you use evolution in your day to day work? El 11/03/13 21:55, Matthew Barnes escribió: On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: The problem is that I have to wait for a new mail window about 16 secs, or more. It constantly hangs or crashes and the interface is little responsive. This may be related to a massive widget leak that Milan discovered in the composer window. Widgets from closed composer windows were sticking around in memory and responding to events, which eats up CPU. So the more composer windows you create during an Evolution session the slower it gets. I believe the bulk of the leakage was fixed in GtkHTML 4.6.3. Matthew Barnes ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 19:51 +0200, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: Last version of evolution constantly crashed for me (the one comes with ubuntu 13.04). Sent a pair of bug reports with launchpad but I cannot continue use the program with this high degree of problems. I was a high evangelist of evolution but right now it has not the quality it used to have. Please add in Ubuntu to your statements as you chose to use a distribution that deliberately ships old versions and doesn't provide upstream bugfix updates to their users. Just to get the facts straight who to blame for missing quality. andre -- Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 21:58 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 19:51 +0200, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: Last version of evolution constantly crashed for me (the one comes with ubuntu 13.04). Sent a pair of bug reports with launchpad but I cannot continue use the program with this high degree of problems. I was a high evangelist of evolution but right now it has not the quality it used to have. Please add in Ubuntu to your statements as you chose to use a distribution that deliberately ships old versions and doesn't provide upstream bugfix updates to their users. +1 Just to get the facts straight who to blame for missing quality. Yep, I'm on openSUSE 12.3 GNOME 3.8.1 and *YES* I use Evolution all day every day. It is stable. -- Adam Tauno Williams mailto:awill...@whitemice.org GPG D95ED383 Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 21:58 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 19:51 +0200, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I was a high evangelist of evolution but right now it has not the quality it used to have. Please add in Ubuntu to your statements as you chose to use a distribution that deliberately ships old versions and doesn't provide upstream bugfix updates to their users. Just to get the facts straight who to blame for missing quality. andre This was true in the past but not now. Ubuntu 13.04, which was released in late April and is based on Gnome 3.6, provides Evolution 3.6.4, released 6 March 2013. Six or seven weeks later: pretty up-to-date. If you like Ubuntu and must have the 3.8 series you can go with Ubuntu Gnome and update to Gnome 3.8; same as with openSUSE. Now that Ubuntu is a sorta-kinda rolling release, I expect more up-to-date versions of everything to appear. Evolution is no longer the default MUA in Ubuntu, but it still integrates nicely with their version of the Gnome calendar. Works very well for me and my extended family. -- N. B. Day 39.4733 North, 119.8100 West and 1399 meters up, Temp: 20.0 C Wed, 08 May 2013 17:25:14 -0700 Ingersoll up 1 day, 5:37, 2 users, load average: 0.22, 0.25, 0.26 Linux 3.8.0-19-generic Ubuntu 13.04, gnome-session 3.6.2, unity 7.0.0 ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 17:31 -0700, N B Day wrote: Evolution is no longer the default MUA in Ubuntu, but it still integrates nicely with their version of the Gnome calendar. Works very well for me and my extended family. Evolution 3.8 also supports Ubuntu Online Accounts, written by yours truly -- an integration feature their default MUA still lacks. But no, I'm not bitter... ;) Matthew Barnes ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Dienstag, den 09.04.2013, 18:00 -0400 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams: On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 23:34 +0200, Thomas Prost wrote: Am Montag, den 11.03.2013, 15:17 -0430 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan: On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. I think that since introduction of sql backend. You might try this: 1) Stop Evo completely (evolution --force-shutdown) 2) Vacuum the SQL database: cd ~/.local/share/evolution/mail/ for i in `find . -name folders.db` do echo Rebuilding Table $i sqlite3 $i vacuum; done It may or may not help, but it won't do any harm. Seems it worked - even though I couldn't find the vacuum command in the man page ?:-| ??? ??? vacuum is an sqlite command; it is PostgreSQL like syntax equivalent to what most databases call UPDATE STATISTICS [although it does have a somewhat different connotation]. Many applications use SQLite and suffer from this same problem. I wrote a script that searched for SQLite database and vacuums them all. Does it run in all python environments ? -- Thomas Prost thomas.pr...@prosts.info ProstsInfo ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Freitag, den 05.04.2013, 06:03 -0400 schrieb Adam Tauno Williams: On Fri, 2013-04-05 at 11:57 +0200, Thomas Prost wrote: Am Mittwoch, den 27.03.2013, 00:54 +0100 schrieb Thomas Prost: Am Montag, den 11.03.2013, 16:55 -0400 schrieb Matthew Barnes: (...) Widgets from closed composer windows were sticking around in memory and Is there an easy way to check that ^^ ? obviously not :-( No. Hunting memory leaks [in 'unmanaged' code] is tough work; it So let's try something less tough: How much memory is evolution eating up in your installations when in normal function ? Maybe we alltogether can find out a mean that should not be exceeded in normal use ? -- Thomas Prost thomas.pr...@prosts.info ProstsInfo ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Montag, den 11.03.2013, 15:17 -0430 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan: On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. I think that since introduction of sql backend. You might try this: 1) Stop Evo completely (evolution --force-shutdown) 2) Vacuum the SQL database: cd ~/.local/share/evolution/mail/ for i in `find . -name folders.db` do echo Rebuilding Table $i sqlite3 $i vacuum; done It may or may not help, but it won't do any harm. Seems it worked - even though I couldn't find the vacuum command in the man page ?:-| ??? -- Thomas Prost thomas.pr...@prosts.info ProstsInfo ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 23:34 +0200, Thomas Prost wrote: Am Montag, den 11.03.2013, 15:17 -0430 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan: On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. I think that since introduction of sql backend. You might try this: 1) Stop Evo completely (evolution --force-shutdown) 2) Vacuum the SQL database: cd ~/.local/share/evolution/mail/ for i in `find . -name folders.db` do echo Rebuilding Table $i sqlite3 $i vacuum; done It may or may not help, but it won't do any harm. Seems it worked - even though I couldn't find the vacuum command in the man page ?:-| ??? ??? vacuum is an sqlite command; it is PostgreSQL like syntax equivalent to what most databases call UPDATE STATISTICS [although it does have a somewhat different connotation]. Many applications use SQLite and suffer from this same problem. I wrote a script that searched for SQLite database and vacuums them all. http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2011/11/all-those-sqlite-databases.html Applications have gotten better about the care and feeding of their pet databases, but running through them occasionally doesn't hurt - and sometimes releases a surprising amount of disk space. -- Adam Tauno Williams GPG D95ED383 Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 23:34 +0200, Thomas Prost wrote: Am Montag, den 11.03.2013, 15:17 -0430 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan: On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. I think that since introduction of sql backend. You might try this: 1) Stop Evo completely (evolution --force-shutdown) 2) Vacuum the SQL database: cd ~/.local/share/evolution/mail/ for i in `find . -name folders.db` do echo Rebuilding Table $i sqlite3 $i vacuum; done It may or may not help, but it won't do any harm. Seems it worked - even though I couldn't find the vacuum command in the man page ?:-| ??? The command is sqlite3. vacuum is a parameter (presumably an SQL function). poc ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Mittwoch, den 27.03.2013, 00:54 +0100 schrieb Thomas Prost: Am Montag, den 11.03.2013, 16:55 -0400 schrieb Matthew Barnes: (...) Widgets from closed composer windows were sticking around in memory and Is there an easy way to check that ^^ ? obviously not :-( -- Thomas Prost thomas.pr...@prosts.info ProstsInfo ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Fri, 2013-04-05 at 11:57 +0200, Thomas Prost wrote: Am Mittwoch, den 27.03.2013, 00:54 +0100 schrieb Thomas Prost: Am Montag, den 11.03.2013, 16:55 -0400 schrieb Matthew Barnes: (...) Widgets from closed composer windows were sticking around in memory and Is there an easy way to check that ^^ ? obviously not :-( No. Hunting memory leaks [in 'unmanaged' code] is tough work; it usually involves a tool like valgrind and a full development stack. Or just code review at a maddeningly tedious level [this works best at 2am in a dark world of complete silence, or accompanied by harsh death metal rock at a volume of stun]. But I believe Mr. Barnes indicated the problem mentioned is fixed in current releases. Even in 'managed' code [Java, .NET, etc...] it involves sifting through a lot of data; first you have to see the leak, and *then* you have to figure out what code is to blame. And asking yourself 'why didn't I just become a bar tender?' ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Even in 'managed' code [Java, .NET, etc...] it involves sifting through a lot of data; first you have to see the leak, and *then* you have to figure out what code is to blame. And asking yourself 'why didn't I just become a bar tender?' Because after a few nights of dealing with drunk punters you reach the conclusion that bug hunting in the middle of the night is a more rewarding activity. Been there, done that, got the scars. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Am Montag, den 11.03.2013, 16:55 -0400 schrieb Matthew Barnes: (...) Widgets from closed composer windows were sticking around in memory and Is there an easy way to check that ^^ ? responding to events, which eats up CPU. So the more composer windows you create during an Evolution session the slower it gets. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
El mar, 12-03-2013 a las 06:06 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams escribió: On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 09:54 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I wonder how to start debugging here. Maybe strace to see what your computer is doing? Have you checked forums and bugtrackers of your distribution if other users face the same problem? I've checked some lists, googling, etc and found some really angry users about evo performance. But I don't rely on just one opinion and continued looking for help. There's nothing more I can find, so I went to this list. I thought that an SSD disk would help but it does not. No, because the computer is actually possibly doing nothing - so more horsepower will not help. That is why it is important to see what is actually going on. Most of the performance problems are encounter are not due to insufficient resources; but are the result of something waiting on something, that is possibly waiting on something. Everyone waiting. Computers are more powerful and applications more complex - so this is the 21st century performance problem. Fortunately it usually isn't that difficult to suss out what is going on [or not going on]. And I don't want to do old way of solving problems: If your program is slow, buy a new computer. That's not the way. Nobody recommended that. But I want Evolution go better... As does everyone here. ___ Hi! This is just for information: I'm on Fedora 18 64-bits, using Mate and Evolution 3.6.3. I have some little issues with performance too. Yesterday I ran Bleachbit and now is working better. Not perfect but better. Also, when I run Evolution from console it claims that some font config file is deprecated. I think this is slowing down my Evo too. That's all, regards, Lailah signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 16:55 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: I believe the bulk of the leakage was fixed in GtkHTML 4.6.3. Hi, it's about this one [1], GtkHTML 4.6.3+ and evo/eds 3.6.4+. Sadly, it's not enough. The composer does some crazy stuff in the background when there are more (sending?) accounts configured. It's not that much visible in normal usage, but trying to open the composer window when evolution runs under valgrind is just impossible for me, with 55 configured mail accounts, but only 6 enabled (not counting On This Computer and Search Folders). As far as I can tell, this is introduced since 3.6.x, and might be interesting to investigate, because the composer window doesn't look complicate, just a toolbar and few buttons/widgets around, thus it might be something it does in the background. Just my opinion. Bye, Milan [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=689476 ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
El lun, 11-03-2013 a las 20:57 +0100, Andre Klapper escribió: Hi, On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. Evo version is 3.6.2. 3.6.2 is not latest Evolution. You might want to ask your distribution to ship the latest bugfix version for you. This is ubuntu 12.10 there's nothing newer. At least not like a Beta. I think that since introduction of sql backend. Assuming that you meant the sqlite backend, you have a pretty good memory as you can remember that 5 years ago, Evolution was way more performant than the last 4 1/2 years. I just don't understand why you bring it up now and not earlier? Ye, I have memory when it relates to my day to day. I'm suffering this since then. I wanted to bring it up earlier but wanted to be sure... After 4 years, I'm sure. That was a mistake. :D I think that developers must put an exclamation mark on this issue since will made evo lost every client. If a relevant number of users is affected and if the problem has actually something to do with Evolution, that is correct. I wonder how to start debugging here. Maybe strace to see what your computer is doing? Have you checked forums and bugtrackers of your distribution if other users face the same problem? I've checked some lists, googling, etc and found some really angry users about evo performance. But I don't rely on just one opinion and continued looking for help. There's nothing more I can find, so I went to this list. I thought that an SSD disk would help but it does not. And I don't want to do old way of solving problems: If your program is slow, buy a new computer. That's not the way. Evolution used to work really well. But performance degraded over time. I think that maybe someone was already looking at this problem. So I wanted to share. The obvious solution is to switch to Thunderbird that works well. But I want Evolution go better... andre attachment: face-smile-big.png___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 09:54 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I wonder how to start debugging here. Maybe strace to see what your computer is doing? Have you checked forums and bugtrackers of your distribution if other users face the same problem? I've checked some lists, googling, etc and found some really angry users about evo performance. But I don't rely on just one opinion and continued looking for help. There's nothing more I can find, so I went to this list. I thought that an SSD disk would help but it does not. No, because the computer is actually possibly doing nothing - so more horsepower will not help. That is why it is important to see what is actually going on. Most of the performance problems are encounter are not due to insufficient resources; but are the result of something waiting on something, that is possibly waiting on something. Everyone waiting. Computers are more powerful and applications more complex - so this is the 21st century performance problem. Fortunately it usually isn't that difficult to suss out what is going on [or not going on]. And I don't want to do old way of solving problems: If your program is slow, buy a new computer. That's not the way. Nobody recommended that. But I want Evolution go better... As does everyone here. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
[Evolution] About performance
Hello, I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. I think that since introduction of sql backend. The problem is that I have to wait for a new mail window about 16 secs, or more. It constantly hangs or crashes and the interface is little responsive. Evo version is 3.6.2. I think this is not normal. I have to say that software is on a SSD disk and data is on SATA 3GB disk. I don't see much IO on disks while operating so it seems to be something related with evo in its core. Is someone experiencing this kind of issues? I have that the problem is so awful that I'm thinking to switch to thunderbird. I think that developers must put an exclamation mark on this issue since will made evo lost every client. With no users to maintain the project will die. So it's a blocking issue. Some data: 5 accounts configured. IMAP/POP 1002M .cache/evolution/ du -sh .local/share/evolution/ 3,2G.local/share/evolution/ My system has 8GB and no need to swap and a RAID 1 disk for the data storage. System is on SSD as I said before. Main account has only 2000 Mails, the rest is on local disk (Account) that for me is like a backup for the online accounts (IMAP ones). Thank you. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. I think that since introduction of sql backend. You might try this: 1) Stop Evo completely (evolution --force-shutdown) 2) Vacuum the SQL database: cd ~/.local/share/evolution/mail/ for i in `find . -name folders.db` do echo Rebuilding Table $i sqlite3 $i vacuum; done It may or may not help, but it won't do any harm. poc ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 15:17 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. I think that since introduction of sql backend. You might try this: 1) Stop Evo completely (evolution --force-shutdown) 2) Vacuum the SQL database: cd ~/.local/share/evolution/mail/ for i in `find . -name folders.db` do echo Rebuilding Table $i sqlite3 $i vacuum; done Reminds me of my BLOG post http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2011/11/all-those-sqlite-databases.html -- Adam Tauno Williams GPG D95ED383 Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
Hi, On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: I'm experiencing a lot of performance issues with latests evolution. Evo version is 3.6.2. 3.6.2 is not latest Evolution. You might want to ask your distribution to ship the latest bugfix version for you. I think that since introduction of sql backend. Assuming that you meant the sqlite backend, you have a pretty good memory as you can remember that 5 years ago, Evolution was way more performant than the last 4 1/2 years. I just don't understand why you bring it up now and not earlier? I think that developers must put an exclamation mark on this issue since will made evo lost every client. If a relevant number of users is affected and if the problem has actually something to do with Evolution, that is correct. I wonder how to start debugging here. Maybe strace to see what your computer is doing? Have you checked forums and bugtrackers of your distribution if other users face the same problem? andre -- Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:57 +0100, Andre Klapper wrote: Assuming that you meant the sqlite backend, you have a pretty good memory as you can remember that 5 years ago, Evolution was way more performant than the last 4 1/2 years. I just don't understand why you bring it up now and not earlier? I think that developers must put an exclamation mark on this issue since will made evo lost every client. If a relevant number of users is affected and if the problem has actually something to do with Evolution, that is correct. I wonder how to start debugging here. Maybe strace to see what your computer is doing? Have you checked forums and bugtrackers of your distribution if other users face the same problem? The real question is what is it doing when it is sitting there doing nothing. It isn't that hard to suss out. http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2012/10/d-is-for-debugging.html -- Adam Tauno Williams GPG D95ED383 Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] About performance
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 20:20 +0100, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado wrote: The problem is that I have to wait for a new mail window about 16 secs, or more. It constantly hangs or crashes and the interface is little responsive. This may be related to a massive widget leak that Milan discovered in the composer window. Widgets from closed composer windows were sticking around in memory and responding to events, which eats up CPU. So the more composer windows you create during an Evolution session the slower it gets. I believe the bulk of the leakage was fixed in GtkHTML 4.6.3. Matthew Barnes ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
