From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#4954: 23.1; Emacs hangs when two run-at-time calls in effect Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 02:33:38 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4B0415BC.9010400@ufl.edu> <4B049F66.2020104@ufl.edu> Reply-To: Lennart Borgman , 4954@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1258595264 11495 80.91.229.12 (19 Nov 2009 01:47:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:47:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 4954@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com To: Sullivan Beck Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 19 02:47:36 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NAw7T-0004VS-9W for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 02:47:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46241 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NAw7S-0008O2-Hv for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:47:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NAw7N-0008Mt-06 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:47:29 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NAw7I-0008Ie-9E for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:47:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39259 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NAw7I-0008IH-3g for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:47:24 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:39087) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NAw7H-0005Ro-FQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:47:23 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu (rzlab.ucr.edu [127.0.0.1]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id nAJ1lKGT028296; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:47:21 -0800 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id nAJ1e56U027548; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:40:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:40:05 -0800 X-Loop: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Resent-From: Lennart Borgman Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs 2Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:40:05 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: followup 4954 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 4954-submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B4954.125859444526928 (code B ref 4954); Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:40:05 +0000 Original-Received: (at 4954) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 19 Nov 2009 01:34:05 +0000 X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.5 Bayes not run. spammytokens:Tokens not available. hammytokens:Tokens not available. Original-Received: from mail-yx0-f190.google.com (mail-yx0-f190.google.com [209.85.210.190]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id nAJ1Y3SR026917 for <4954@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:34:05 -0800 Original-Received: by yxe28 with SMTP id 28so1592305yxe.19 for <4954@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:33:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=huLEp/HaKOuBaxPzsnreGwNGftxclQQWCEbYQFbzk+k=; b=ag8LurO/Zw+X1E7Jps3aiYFzEla5mabBgkfhzHmLGX2s7lNoDS6Sa0Xu1QBz8+Vf+S QiF2avYpUqBxd9zK8eI5YBBcUIBUcHDgJFfvPSjjB9XEpDDC/CBR7nTyxMpHXMeWNqkR BitUlQM5HjH0IZZ1WjT7lIgvvYzc4pPfLoS7o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=bqdMQric5sHa3t9bxXYxl25CA8kAFI/zBJapD5Jv7Xg0U2hsKw9qdPclWF3XO30LMr koIspLHU0CgSIZJnbGR/8SMaqby24aIKbl6fKYYHJJFbBFnJxEe7M93RmDOb+E+bMBTV l2dbnu/9uZSq/zE7FNnv1PKDJ9CjoM2eHsaU4= Original-Received: by 10.101.189.3 with SMTP id r3mr3182245anp.105.1258594438095; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:33:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B049F66.2020104@ufl.edu> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:47:28 -0500 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:32693 Archived-At: On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:29 AM, Sullivan Beck wrote: > > It could be... and I certainly considered the fact that perhaps both were > trying to do something at the same time and were blocking each other > somehow. > > My problem with this is that the slowness doesn't go away once it's started. > If the two saves are EXACTLY in sync with each other (and it's possible... I > gave them both a 5 minute interval, and they were initialized right after > each other), I wouldn't be surprised to see emacs become sluggish for a few > seconds every 5 minutes. > > The problem is that once the sluggishness starts, it persists for several > minutes. I've never tried to outwait it for too long of a time, but I've > certainly given it 2-3 minutes, and the sluggishness persists. If the two > operations can't figure out in that time how to get their writes done, I'd > say that it has to be a bug in that code. > > I'll bet that your suggestion of starting up a run-with-idle-timer would be > a good workaround (and I may or may not do it... probably not since the > workaround I've already got is good enough for me). > > I mainly submitted the bug so that whoever is in charge of the code that > runs the timer may look at it. I'm probably at a point where I'm satisfied > with what I've got, at least for the time being. > > Anyway, thanks for the reply. Thanks for your good description. I do not understand what is going on so someone who knows more than me about this must jump in. All I can say is that reading your description above it sounds like something is seriously wrong.