From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: pjb@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Why is Emacs so slow when used remotely? Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:05:29 +0200 Organization: Informatimago Message-ID: <874odiylly.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> References: <76f5ba95-cc68-4326-a962-f515c0fb70cd@y31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com> <3ebca0e6-c698-44dd-a4fd-6166233f5eba@q26g2000vbn.googlegroups.com> <87ocbqsq3g.fsf@puma.rapttech.com.au> <87tylizq1x.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> <87d3s6s1y3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1291879005 12943 80.91.229.12 (9 Dec 2010 07:16:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 07:16:45 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 09 08:16:41 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PQak4-0000nQ-EF for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Dec 2010 08:16:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54481 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PQa6U-0002lB-Rz for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Dec 2010 01:35:47 -0500 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 32 Original-X-Trace: individual.net HUVQ252HnOoQitLwwEEemgDmS6yxG1xidqjiZJvXcC/Pnr29NN Cancel-Lock: sha1:M2VhOTkzMDM0MzI0OWY0NDU1NThjNDE5MjQ3NDcxNmEzODZmN2FhMQ== sha1:RSt3FSU6Lw1dWu3z8zQ1ChegUQU= Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAQMAAABtzGvEAAAABlBMVEUAAAD///+l2Z/dAAAA oElEQVR4nK3OsRHCMAwF0O8YQufUNIQRGIAja9CxSA55AxZgFO4coMgYrEDDQZWPIlNAjwq9 033pbOBPtbXuB6PKNBn5gZkhGa86Z4x2wE67O+06WxGD/HCOGR0deY3f9Ijwwt7rNGNf6Oac l/GuZTF1wFGKiYYHKSFAkjIo1b6sCYS1sVmFhhhahKQssRjRT90ITWUk6vvK3RsPGs+M1RuR mV+hO/VvFAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Accept-Language: fr, es, en X-Disabled: X-No-Archive: no User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:181422 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:76814 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: > pjb@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) writes: > >> Tim X writes: >> >>> A few things to try ... >>> >>> 1. turn off tooltip mode >> >> Yes. Anything graphic. >> >> >>> 2. Try running with -nw to turn off X and only have a terminal UI >>> and see what the performance is like. this will let you know if >>> the problem is basic emacs or the X protocol stuff >> >> This is not useful, if you only work with text. The X protocol is >> not significantly worse than any other terminal protocol to send >> over text. > > Font rendering/antialiasing/composition nowadays happens mostly at > the client side if I am not mistaken. That makes the X protocol > much worse even with text. That's not what I observe. It's possible for an application to deal with characters itself and send bitmaps but normally, and it looks like it's what emacs does, it sends only the strings and the font rendering is done in the X server. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/