Re: Akonadi using 100% CPU resources
On 15/04/2022 09:31, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Which processes of Akonadi are using up the CPU? In case it is just a
certain process like "akonadi_indexing_agent", well what I did with this
one is:
chmod 000 /usr/bin/akonadi_indexing_agent
It works.
All of them.
Screenshot:
https://imgur.com/vJFrPPR
Thank you, I will try to block all executables so they never run again.
Do you really not use it? Look at
du -sch ~/.local/share/akonadi/* | sort -rh
If you really do you use it, this should be almost empty beside some
MariaDB journal files.
I nuked that directory yesterday without checking what's inside. Today,
with akonadi stopped, my system works perfectly fine as expected. That
shows how badly (not) my system needs akonadi.
Note: In case you store contacts in KAdressbook or use a calender with
KOrganizer, you actually *use* Akonadi. Akonadi is not just about
storing mails for KMail.
I don't use any of that. I use Thunderbird with its contacts.
What I do on systems where I do not use Akonadi – it may even work well
on systems where it is used – is to replace "akonadi-backend-mysql" by
"akonadi-backend-sqlite". That way I get rid of an additional full blown
database process.
I usually also stop Akonadi with
akonadictl stop
And then do
rm -r ~/.local/share/akonadi
rm -r ~/.config/akonadi
Yes, that's what I did. I killed all processes (had to resort to signal
9) and nuked both directories.
I still believe the end user should not have to do with any of this.
Indeed. Akonadi should never use all of my machine 16 cores in the first
place.
Akonadi is something that drags down the overall good Plasma / KDE
experience unfortunately since more than a decade. I defended it earlier
on. Meanwhile I think it is better to completely replace it.
Yes, totally. Why this abomination cannot be uninstalled without pulling
half of KDE out? Shouldn't that be reported as a bug?
--
With kindest regards, Piotr.
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
Reply to: