Recovery search for files is very slow

[Bèr Kessels (berkes)]

Given:

Deja-dup with either encrypted backup on either local disk or any of the cloud-storage options.

When:
I want to Recover any file from either nautilus or the Deja-Dup dialog.

Then:
I expect the to-be-recovered files to show up in the listing, in a reasonable amount of time.

Instead I got:
The search for options of files to be recovered, takes over 30 minutes to list several files.

Case:
* Been backing up for under a month; incremental, on a local (encryptfs) disk, backups themselves not encrypted.
* Attempt to recover ~/.bashrc.
* Rightclick in nautilus, option "recover missing files".
* Dialog pops up, showing message "searching for files a day ago" (I am using the Dutch locales, exact english message may be different). It searches for 15+ minutes.
* Waiting for the dialog to change its wording to "searching for files up to a month ago", for the file I want recovered was changed a week ago. It searches for over 30 minutes (15+30 = 45 minutes waiting).

I could expect the actual recovery to take long. But the listing could be sped up greatly e.g. by introducing an index-file. At the very least, the dialog should show progress, many users might expect it to be stuck when it does not change for over 45 minutes.

Technical data:
Description: Ubuntu 12.10
deja-dup 24.0-0ubuntu1
duplicity 0.6.19-0ubuntu2

[Óscar García Amor (oscar-garcia-amor)]

No news for this since 2012 ???

[Andreas E. (andreas-e)]

This is still a severe limitation. I am not a person with a lot of data (considering hard drive sizes, 120GB is sparing). I know the files I want to recover and the time range, but I have to give up the expectation of having these files before tomorrow.

[Michael Terry (mterry)]

As a workaround, you can run "deja-dup --restore FILENAME" if you already know the missing file name.

[Michael Terry (mterry)]

That specific dialog has been removed. It did a lot of scanning.

We have a new restore & browse view that might also have performance issues (though it does less). But if so, please file a new bug about it. Thanks!