On Wednesday 19 August 2009, Alexander Larsson wrote: > On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 22:17 +0200, David Faure wrote: > > And then it's up to implementations to update that value, when > > adding a file to the trash, restoring a trashed file, deleting a trashed > > file, and when emptying the trash. > > > > Is this OK with other implementors of the trash spec? Can it be added > > to the spec? > > I'm a bit concerned about the performance costs of this. It means that > you need to do a deep recursion into a folder counting its size when it > is trashed. Whereas otherwise trashing a large folder structure is O(1) > it now becomed O(number of files) and does a lot more I/O.
Correct. However the alternative (in order to implement a max size of the trash) is that every operation that puts a new file into the trash is O(number of files in the trash), which is clearly a lot worse! Do you agree that the feature "maximum size of the trash" is useful? I know many users who do ;-). Yes, even at the expense of a bit of performance (especially if the size-counting can be done without blocking the user interface, as is the case for us since the actual trash operations are handled in the kioslave which is a separate process; I think it's similar in gio?). -- David Faure, [email protected], sponsored by Qt Software @ Nokia to work on KDE, Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org). _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
