[chandler-users] Some thoughts from new user

[Andi Vajda]

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, killerwhale65 wrote:

> When using the program, there is a delay of about 1 second on every click. 
> Doesnt matter where i click, it is only executed 1 second after the click, 
> with or without virus scanner. It starts already when chandler is not the 
> active window. I click in the taskbar on chandler, and, guess what, only 
> after 1 second the chandler window pops up. No other program has that.

Yeah, this is the unexpected thing. I agree with you that it's unacceptable. 
Maybe someone on this list using real Windows can help you further as I 
can't reproduce this. I tried this both running OS X Chandler and Windows 
Chandler on my virtualized Windows 2000 parallels installation (on the same 
Mac, my virtual machine is setup with only 452 Mb, by the way).

Regards,

Andi..

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andi Vajda [mailto:vajda at osafoundation.org]
> Sent: vrijdag 11 april 2008 20:05
> To: killerwhale65
> Cc: chandler-users at osafoundation.org
> Subject: RE: [chandler-users] Some thoughts from new user
>
>
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, killerwhale65 wrote:
>
>> a big program, for me, is a workhorse, like photoshop, a video editor ...
>> You work on it, do specific things during a specific time in that
>> program only, then close it.
>>
>> A small program - small because of what it is supposed to do, maybe
>> not because of how it is built but thats for the makers - is started
>> when you start the PC, and stays on for the rest of the day. You don't
>> use it very much, you occasionaly type something, you occasionaly read
>> something, but you dont really use it to achieve things unlike a video
>> editor or imaging program. It is a program that should run in the
>> background, and thus be very light (my opinion).
>
> Yeah, I agree with your definitions. Chandler is neither, though. It's not the big thing that takes over all other tasks nor is it
> the lightweight program that discreetly sits in the background.
>
>> As for startup time, it always takes 41 seconds after boot. When i
>> close it, then start it again without rebooting, its only 12 seconds.
>> But since i never sleep my computer, but always shut it down, i
>> reference this time agains my other programs, and i find it takes too long.
>
> Ok, so the startup performance you're seeing is explained and you have a solution. What about the performance while running ? In
> your first message to the list you referred to really bad performance while running as well.
> This is what made me ask you about the virus checker. Has turning off the virus checker made any improvement to performance while
> the application is running, in particular when it is committing items to the repository ?
>
> Andi..
>
>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andi Vajda [mailto:vajda at osafoundation.org]
>> Sent: vrijdag 11 april 2008 19:09
>> To: killerwhale65
>> Cc: chandler-users at osafoundation.org
>> Subject: RE: [chandler-users] Some thoughts from new user
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, killerwhale65 wrote:
>>
>>> It seems to use about 100Mb only, the major part is for the python
>>> server, chandler itself uses only 1Mb. I am running Chandler now and
>>> total memory usage is only 537Mb (including Chandler), so that cant be it.
>>>
>>> I have also disabled the virus scanner, but it stays the same, so
>>> thats also not the reason. Startup time was 41 seconds, which is long.
>>> I can accept such a startup time from a big program like Photoshop.
>>> But for a small program like Chandler, this is too much.
>>
>> Does it take 41s to start always or just the very first time when it
>> creates a repository from scratch ? Or does it take 41s to start after a reboot, always ?
>>
>> The definition of what makes a program 'big' or 'small' sure is up for
>> debate but I would venture to say that the consensus here would be to not call chandler 'small'. Maybe it should be but it isn't.
>> Could you elaborate on why photoshop is 'big' and chandler is 'small' ?
>>
>> Nevertheless, a 41s startup time is not good. On my Macbook Pro 2.2
>> Ghz Intel Core 2 duo, 4gb RAM, it takes 35s to start after a fresh
>> reboot and when creating a repository from scratch. The next chandler start takes only 5s (repository already exists, OS is still
> caching the executable pieces).
>> It takes 18s to start with creating a fresh repository if the executable pieces are already cached by the OS.
>>
>> Chandler is a pretty large program made of many shared libraries. The
>> operating system's dynamic linker is pulling in a lot of them at
>> startup time. This can take a while after a fresh reboot since none of them is cached yet. I've seen Windows users always shutdown
> and reboot their laptops instead of sleeping them. This could be a cause of the regular longer startup times you might see.
>> I always sleep my mac so a typical chandler start takes closer to 5-10s for me.
>>
>> Andi..
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Matthias Thoen
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andi Vajda [mailto:vajda at osafoundation.org]
>>> Sent: donderdag 10 april 2008 20:34
>>> To: killerwhale65
>>> Cc: chandler-users at osafoundation.org
>>> Subject: RE: [chandler-users] Some thoughts from new user
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, killerwhale65 wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am currently only using 600Mb RAM, so plenty of empty memory left.
>>>
>>> It is not unheard of for Chandler to use 400 Mb of RAM or more. So,
>>> I'd say that you're at the limit if that amount doesn't include chandler already.
>>>
>>>> As for the virus scanner, i dont see an option to exclude
>>>> directories, at least not for the background scanning, only for the manual scans.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I can't help you with the specifics there, I don't run Windows.
>>>
>>> If you can run the simple experiment to see if disabling the virus
>>> scanner altogether - temporarily - has an effect on the performance issues you reported, it might be worth exploring this more.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Andi..
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG.
>>> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.11/1368 - Release Date:
>>> 9/04/2008 16:20
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>> Checked by AVG.
>>> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.12/1373 - Release Date:
>>> 11/04/2008 9:17
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.12/1373 - Release Date:
>> 11/04/2008 9:17
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.12/1373 - Release Date:
>> 11/04/2008 9:17
>>
>>
>>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.12/1373 - Release Date: 11/04/2008 9:17
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.12/1373 - Release Date: 11/04/2008 9:17
>
>
>