On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 19:42 +0800, Emfox Zhou wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Patrick Ohly <[email protected]> > wrote: > On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 16:45 +0800, Emfox Zhou wrote: > > > > > > OK, after try several times, I found there's some log at > very last > > lines: > > > > > > [2014-07-25 23:49:41.206] Slow sync and not resuming -> all > items are > > first reported sop_wants_replace (will become add later) > > [2014-07-25 23:49:41.206] addressbook: reading > 6f14569e895e1499 from > > cache > > [2014-07-25 23:49:41.206] addressbook: requested 1779, > retrieved 1779 > > from server in 36 queries, misses 0/1779 (0%) > > [2014-07-25 23:49:41.206] addressbook: ReadItemAsKey > > aID=(6f14569e895e1499,) res=0 > > +[2014-07-25 23:49:41.206] 'ScriptExecute' - Start executing > Script, > > name=afterreadscript [--][++] [->end] [->enclosing] > > [2014-07-25 23:49:41.214] Fetched record data from DB with > > localID=6f14569e895e1499 > > [2014-07-25 23:49:41.214] Item LocalID='6f14569e895e1499', > > RemoteID='', operation=wants-replace, size: > > [maxlocal,maxremote,actual] > > > > > > How could it be 1779 contacts, while I has only 979 > contacts? (there's > > also > > 154 contacts in google plus circle, I don't know if it > matters) > > > I don't know what Google reports to you via CardDAV. > > You can check with: > syncevolution --print-items <phone config name> addressbook > and get the actual content with: > syncevolution --export - <phone config name> addressbook > > > So that's sure the phone received more than 1000 contacts > and refused > > to > > continue the syncing. I see 'reading from .... cache', maybe > it's the > > earlier > > data not successfully synced. Does 'rm -rf > ~/.cache/syncevolution' > > fully > > clear the cache, or any other place I should purge? > > > No. The debug message refers to the in-memory read-ahead > cache. It gets > filled anew during each run. > > > > > syncevolution --export - c102 addressbook |grep "BEGIN" |wc -l > 979 > > > So, it's correct.
You seem to have data dumps and comparison at the start of the sync active. That's why most contacts were requested twice - once during the data dump, then again during the actual sync. So 1779 is probably correct, too. > Don't know why, and I'd like to give up, since my contacts > will soon get more than 1000, it's not so realistic to keep the old > phone > synced. Your choice. I still think it might have something to do with the specific contact that failed to get accepted by the phone. -- 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. _______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.syncevolution.org/mailman/listinfo/syncevolution
