[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#1092963: korganizer: Each action in Korganizer are extremely slow since last debian testing update of kdepim6



I installed the latest version of the mysql backend, however I was puzzled by the fact that you could install different backend at the same time.

I thought that it would convert from one database to the other during the installation process, but no.

I searched how to migrate from sqlite to mysql (I do not remember doing the mysql to sqlite migration in the first place), and stumbled upon https://dev.gnupg.org/T6862.


It looks like the existing akonadi migration is pretty useless and requires lots of manual work, and in the end is just not robust enough.


I'd prefer having a solution for the current sqlite backend I use, because Korganizer is, as stated before, unusable in this state.

Could I record some logs to see where the slowness comes from?


Regards,

Alexandre Bonneau


Le lundi 13 janvier 2025, 15:46:51 UTC−10:00 Alexandre Bonneau a écrit :

>     Hello Patrick,

>

> Well, that's unfortunate.

>

> > Which database type are you using ?

>

> » dlg akonadi

> rc  akonadi-backend-mysql    4:22.12.2-1

> ii  akonadi-backend-sqlite      4:24.12.0-2

>

> I'm not sure why the migration to 24.12 used sqlite instead of mysql. Could

> that explain the extremely slow response time in Korganizer?

>

> > Which calendar type are you using ?

>

> I'm using akonadi_davgroupware_resource_1 for a nextcloud-synchronized

> calendar.

>

> I'll try to install akonadi-backend-mysql 24.12 and see if that fixes

> anything

> > Control: severity -1 important

> >

> > Hej,

> >

> > Am Montag, 13. Januar 2025, 23:50:06 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Bonneau:

> > > Package: korganizer

> > > Version: 4:24.12.0-3

> > > Severity: grave

> > > Justification: renders package unusable

> > > X-Debbugs-Cc: alexandre.bonneau@linuxfr.eu

> > >

> > > Dear Maintainer,

> > >

> > >    * What led up to the situation?

> > >

> > > Last week (approx 2025-01-06) I updated Debian testing with all the

> > > new akonadi, korganizer and kdepim6 packages.

> > >

> > >    * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or

> > >   

> > >      ineffective)?

> > >

> > > Just updated, then rebooted (multiple times).

> > >

> > >    * What was the outcome of this action?

> > >

> > > After the updated was applied, you can see Korganizer has changed a

> > > bit, for instance the task description are now hidden by the endDate

> > > time, while before you could read the task description (but that's

> > > for another bug report). However the BIG problem here is that every

> > > single action in korganizer (not in kmail) takes between 4 to 10

> > > seconds to execute.

> > > You want to use the mousewheel on the mini-calendar view to switch

> > > weeks ; 10 seconds wait time for _each_ week.

> > > You want to edit a tasks by double-cliking it; 5 seconds of wait time.

> > > Wait, there's more; once the task editor opens, you again have 3-4

> > > seconds of wait time before being able to edit it's description.

> > > You want to move a task to another day/time, 5 seconds.

> > > You want to create an event, 5 seconds.

> > > You get the gist; it has become _unusable_; how could that pass for

> > > unstable to testing, not sure.

> > >

> > >    * What outcome did you expect instead?

> > >

> > > Each of the actions described above should be instant, like it has

> > > always been for the last 20 years.

> > >

> > >

> > > Please revert any patch applied during the last (two?) week so that

> > > it's usable again.

> > >

> > > Thanks for your time and work

> >

> > I can absolutely not reproduce your observations. korganizer is as fast

> > as ever for those actions you described for me. I suspect it's either

> > something in your akonadi database or maybe some old config causing

> > trouble.

> >

> > Which database type are you using ?

> > Which calendar type are you using ?

> >

> > What you can do is create a new user on your system and see if you can

> > observe a similar behaviour.

> >

> > And no, reverting the update to 24.12 is not an option.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: