From kde-core-devel  Sun Nov 24 18:42:25 2013
From: Mark Gaiser <markg85 () gmail ! com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:42:25 +0000
To: kde-core-devel
Subject: Re: KMountPoint::probablySlow and cifs mount points
Message-Id: <CAPd6JnF2z0Xzy=tsncExN2Y3hK56YhczthxAMO_Lo3kVbwTgLQ () mail ! gmail ! com>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=138531859909588

On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Albert Astals Cid <aacid@kde.org> wrote:
> In Okular we just got bug
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=327846
> PDF Render time is unreasonably slow over cifs on high latency (WAN) network
> connections
>
> Basically the issue is that poppler is quite read-intensive over files,
> reading them over and over, and since the file is "local but really remote" it
> takes ages to render for big files.
>
> The only solution i can think of is doing a local copy and then working on
> that.

That would work with small files (< 10 MB) but will get you into
trouble for bigger files.
You can't - or shouldn't - do that in an automated manner. If the user
manually copies the file and then opens it in a pdf reader: fine. Just
don't auto copy the file. So you can probably give the user a popup
suggesting them to copy the file to his local drive?
>
> I saw KMountPoint::probablySlow that says
>
>     /**
>      * Checks if the filesystem that is probably slow (nfs mounts).
>      * @return true if the filesystem is probably slow
>      */
>
> And then returns true if the the filesystem type of the mount is nfs, autofs
> or subfs.
>
> Any objection to replacing
>
>     /**
>      * Checks if the filesystem that is probably slow (nfs mounts).
>      * @return true if the filesystem is probably slow
>      */
>
> to
>
>     /**
>      * Checks if the filesystem that is probably slow (network mounts).
>      * @return true if the filesystem is probably slow
>      */
>
> and adding cifs to the list of mounttypes that are "probablySlow"?

It's not my place to object since the code isn't mine. Yet i do
disagree. Everything becomes slow if you mount it over a WAN. Whatever
it is. It also depends on your internet connection and where you're
connecting to. Saying smb, nfs or cifs is slow - per se - is plain
wrong. All of those are "likely" fast if you mount them locally.

>
> Or anyone has a better suggestion to fix this issue?

What should be done is detecting is the target is mounted via a slow
connection. So if it's mounted via the internet then "probablySlow"
should return true. On the other hand, i don't know if such checks are
in place and if they are not there, how to implement them.

>
> Cheers,
>   Albert

Just my 5 cents.