From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Uday S Reddy Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#5099: 23.1; Performance problems in Emacs 23? Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:46:43 +0000 Message-ID: <84zl61daq4.fsf@cs.bham.ac.uk> Reply-To: Uday S Reddy , 5099@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1259751218 10401 80.91.229.12 (2 Dec 2009 10:53:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 10:53:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: U.S.Reddy@cs.bham.ac.uk To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 02 11:53:30 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 1NFmpt-0006il-Q4 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:53:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39792 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NFmpt-0006Wl-Fd for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:53:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NFlBN-0001nc-BT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:07:33 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NFlBH-0001jj-Aj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:07:32 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55015 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NFlBG-0001jL-WC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:07:27 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:44987) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NFlBG-0005Pk-HJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:07:26 -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 nB297NbE008711; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 01:07:24 -0800 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id nB28t8mp007058; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 00:55:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 00:55:08 -0800 X-Loop: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Resent-From: Uday S Reddy Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs 2Resent-Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:55:07 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: report 5099 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B.12597436236563 (code B ref -1); Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:55:07 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 2 Dec 2009 08:47:03 +0000 X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.5 Bayes not run. spammytokens:Tokens not available. hammytokens:Tokens not available. Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id nB28l19q006560 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 00:47:02 -0800 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NFkrV-0001Jb-3H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:47:01 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NFkrQ-0001HL-2t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:47:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59526 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NFkrP-0001H6-Es for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:46:55 -0500 Original-Received: from sun60.bham.ac.uk ([147.188.128.137]:62337) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NFkrO-0003R8-JV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:46:54 -0500 Original-Received: from [147.188.128.127] (helo=bham.ac.uk) by sun60.bham.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1NFkrL-0007fJ-Om for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:46:51 +0000 Original-Received: from mx1.cs.bham.ac.uk ([147.188.192.53]) by bham.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NFkrL-0002m3-Eu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:46:51 +0000 Original-Received: from gromit.cs.bham.ac.uk ([147.188.193.16] helo=MARUTI.cs.bham.ac.uk) by mx1.cs.bham.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1NFkrL-0005Kq-F0; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:46:51 +0000 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) Resent-Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:07:31 -0500 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:49:59 -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:33138 Archived-At: Hello, I am a maintainer of the VM mail reader package. Back in October 2008, one of our users who was trying out a pre-release of Eamcs 23 reported that "VM continually freezes my emacs". "At first I thought this was because it was collecting mail, so I set `vm-auto-get-new-mail' to nil, but still VM will burn my CPU and freeze my emacs for 5-20 seconds at a time." My response to this was that his mail folders must have gotten big, and so the garbage collection or auto-save pauses must have become significant. However, having tried Emacs 23 for an hour, I have noticed very much the same phenomenon. My main mail file is roughly 100MB large. It takes Emacs 22 only about 5 seconds to save it, and the auto-save pause is probably half that long. (I use a reasonably fast Solid State Drive.) The CPU utilisation is an A-shaped curve, implying that there is nothing much for the CPU to do. In contrast, Emacs 23 takes about more than 20 seconds to save the same mail file and the CPU utilisation is a pretty intensive burn for most of that time (20% on one processor and 60% on a second processor). The auto-save pauses are about 10-15 seconds long. Now, VM mail files are raw-text. Saving them should be an I/O-bound process. It is not clear why Emacs 23 should be burning CPU cycles to save raw-text files and taking 3-5 times as long as Emacs 22. Cheers, Uday Reddy In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600) of 2009-07-30 on SOFT-MJASON Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600 configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)' Important settings: value of $LC_ALL: nil value of $LC_COLLATE: nil value of $LC_CTYPE: nil value of $LC_MESSAGES: nil value of $LC_MONETARY: nil value of $LC_NUMERIC: nil value of $LC_TIME: nil value of $LANG: ENU value of $XMODIFIERS: nil locale-coding-system: cp1252 default-enable-multibyte-characters: t Major mode: Info Minor modes in effect: savehist-mode: t tooltip-mode: t mouse-wheel-mode: t menu-bar-mode: t file-name-shadow-mode: t global-font-lock-mode: t font-lock-mode: t blink-cursor-mode: t global-auto-composition-mode: t auto-composition-mode: t auto-encryption-mode: t line-number-mode: t transient-mark-mode: t Recent input: C-h i u u u u m e m SPC C-s b u g C-s C-a m C-x C-f \ e t c / p r o SPC C-s s f l o w C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-a C-x , C-s 2 2 C-s C-s C-s C-s C-r C-r C-s C-s C-s C-s C-s C-a C-x b m m u n d e r SPC SPC SPC n M-x r e p o r t - = e e m a c s - b u g E a m c s SPC E m a c s SPC 2 3 SPC - SPC p e r f o r m a n c e SPC p r o b l e m s ? C-SPC C-n C-n C-n C-n C-n C-n C-n C-n C-p C-p C-p C-w C-o C-o C-v C-v C-x , C-x u C-x u C-x u C-x u C-x k M-x r e p o r t = - e - e m a c s - b u SPC Recent messages: Quit [2 times] Info-extract-pointer: Node has no Up Mark saved where search started [2 times] Mark set Mark saved where search started Parsing d:/Home/udr/.mailrc... Parsing y:/dotfiles/.mailrc... done Parsing d:/Home/udr/.mailrc... done Mark set [2 times] Undo! [4 times]