-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/106836/#review20307
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Currently there's only one user of ItemFetchJob (and thus this code) in threads I'm aware of, the legacy KRes compat bridges. Since it's supported and working, I think we need the mutex to keep it that way, even if not used much right now.

I've looked at KMime AddrSpec/Mailbox, which probably should be changed to storing the joint version rather than three parts, but that can't be easily done in a BC way, the members are not in a private class.

- Volker Krause


On Oct. 13, 2012, 8:06 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/106836/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 13, 2012, 8:06 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDEPIM and KDEPIM-Libraries.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Leverage QString implicit sharing to reduce memory consumption. In my tests, the memory decreases roughly by ~20MB from a total of 300 down to about 280MB.
> 
> My question is rather, whether this really needs to be thread safe or not. Maybe also some performance testing is required?
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   plugins/akonadi_serializer_mail.h cf43949 
>   plugins/akonadi_serializer_mail.cpp 096073a 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/106836/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Ran KMail, not noticeably slower but uses less ram. Nothing else seems to have changed.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Milian Wolff
> 
>

_______________________________________________
KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/