[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: low performance of kio
From:       Ian Zepp <icszepp () islc ! net>
Date:       2000-04-20 12:25:43
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 10:11:57AM +0200, Stephan Kulow wrote:
> Stefan Schimanski wrote:
> > 
> > Am Wed, 19 Apr 2000 schrieb Stephan Kulow:
> > > Stefan Schimanski wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I did some performance test of the KIO library and was very disappointed. A
> > > > SimpleJob reading a local file only transfered 180-200 KB/s. Reading with stdio
> > > > functions (fopen, fread, etc.) transfer more than 3000 KB/s! Although KIO works
> > > > in background with signals and slots it should be faster I think. Is there any
> > > > chance to speed it up?
> > > >
> > > Why should it be faster? KIO isn't really made for reading local files,
> > > but
> > > for network transparency, where 200KB/s is most often good enough. if
> > > you want
> > > to read a local file, use fopen and fread. What you do when using kio is
> > > doing
> > > the same, but redirect the commands and the data to another process,
> > > inheritly
> > > making it slower as the IPC bandwidth is far lower than the usual file
> > > reading.
> > 
> > I agree. But why are local jobs done in the process at all. Wouldn't it be much
> > better to do them in a in process file? Only an idea...
> 
> Because that blocks the application. If you want speed, use fread - if
> you want
> nonblocking IO, use KIO
> 

Forgive me if this sound naive, but I was under the impression that KIO should be used
whenever possible, in order to promote said "transparency". If you insist that ppl
use which ever method is more appropriate, then use fread for local files and nfs or    
ftp for network operations, and skip KIO altogether.

Regards

Ian

> 

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]