what computer is that? shadows/highlights is a bit expensive, but not _that_ expensive. also the randomness of which module is slow is a little worrying. do you have very little ram maybe?
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Roumano <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Same things with a fresh database & only 50 pictures: > > :( > > [dev_process_thumbnail] pixel pipeline processing took 0.120 secs (0.730 > CPU) > [export] creating pixelpipe took 0.148 secs (0.154 CPU) > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.042 secs (0.037 CPU) initing base buffer > [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.008 secs (0.015 CPU) processing `balance des > blancs' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.003 secs (0.016 CPU) processing `récupération des > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.011 secs (0.055 CPU) processing > `dématriçage' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.006 secs (0.021 CPU) processing `profil de > couleur d'entrée' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.026 secs (0.130 CPU) processing `recadrer et > pivoter' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 17.741 secs (0.000 CPU) processing `ombres et > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.023 secs (0.114 CPU) processing `contraste > local' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.004 secs (0.021 CPU) processing > `niveaux' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.009 secs (0.044 CPU) processing `profil de > couleur de sortie ' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.002 secs (0.009 CPU) processing > `velvia' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.001 secs (0.002 CPU) processing `sous- et > sur-exposition' [thumbnail] > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.001 secs (0.005 CPU) processing > `gamma' [thumbnail] > [dev_process_thumbnail] pixel pipeline processing took 17.878 secs > (0.469 CPU) > > Le mercredi 27 f�vrier 2013 à 09:42 +1300, johannes hanika a écrit : >> the only thing that looks weird to me are the sql queries in between? >> maybe those take a long time just to determine the file name? can you >> try it again with 'darktable --configdir /tmp/dt' to see how a fresh >> database reacts? how many pictures do you have in that? >> >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Roumano <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi Johannes, >> > >> > My problem come back again. >> > >> > So i have try : >> > remove all /usr/lib/darktable (also remove complete the package from my >> > OS), recompile & install the last git version... >> > >> > I don't use the opencl as i have a old graphical card & darktable >> > disable it automaticaly. >> > >> > I have try with this option (on .config/darktable/darktablerc ) >> > >> > plugins/lighttable/low_quality_thumbnails=true >> > never_use_embedded_thumb=false >> >> Same issue >> > My darkroom is not faster, at this moment, i only see freeze on darkroom >> > mode when i make some modification . >> > My file are local (& on a ssd...) >> > >> > Interesting thing on these files ? : (sorry i forgot a LANG=C >> > before ...) >> > >> > >> > /opt/darktable/bin/darktable -d perf > /tmp/darktable_perf >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 14.512 secs (0.000 CPU) processing `récupération >> > des hautes lumières' [full] >> > >> > /opt/darktable/bin/darktable -d all > /tmp/darktable_perf2 >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 30.358 secs (0.000 CPU) processing `balance des >> > blancs' [full] >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 24.694 secs (0.000 CPU) processing `récupération >> > des hautes lumières' [full] >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 10.768 secs (0.036 CPU) processing `renforcer la >> > netteté' [preview] >> > >> > & the max of memory use : (take form cmd line) >> > [memory] before pixelpipe process >> > [memory] max address space (vmpeak): 2202060 kB >> > [memory] cur address space (vmsize): 1943652 kB >> > [memory] max used memory (vmhwm ): 895056 kB >> > [memory] cur used memory (vmrss ): 664756 kB >> > >> > Regards >> > >> > Le lundi 11 f�vrier 2013 à 09:29 +1300, johannes hanika a écrit : >> >> never saw anything like your output there. looks very broken. do you >> >> have old dsos in /usr/lib/darktable/ maybe? are you using opencl for >> >> another pipeline in parallel? do you have the full log maybe? >> >> >> >> these are all thumbnail processes.. you could experiment with the options >> >> >> >> plugins/lighttable/low_quality_thumbnails=true >> >> never_use_embedded_thumb=false >> >> >> >> (try one at a time) in your darktablerc and see if that makes any >> >> difference. >> >> >> >> is darkroom mode faster? are your files on a remote host? >> >> >> >> -jo >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Roumano <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > Actualy my darktable ( git version of 09/02/2013 & stable version 1.1.2 >> >> > ) is >> >> > very slow (for some operation) & my PC is like frozen >> >> > i have tested to launch it with a fresh database : it's the same. >> >> > >> >> > I'm using it on a gentoo machine with 8core, 8Go ram & SSD for the OS & >> >> > raw >> >> > image data ... >> >> > >> >> > If i launch it with "-d perf" : >> >> > i saw many time the "white balance" and shadow & lighlights (but more >> >> > rarely) take lot of time but nearly all the time, O CPU, strange isn't >> >> > it ? >> >> > >> >> > [defaults] found a 64-bit system with 8145292 kb ram and 8 cores (0 atom >> >> > based) >> >> > [defaults] setting high quality defaults >> >> > >> >> > ... >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 8.614 secs (0.350 CPU) processing `shadows and >> >> > highlights' [preview] >> >> > >> >> > ... >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.009 secs (0.029 CPU) processing `balance des >> >> > blancs' >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 10.727 secs (0.000 CPU) processing `récupération >> >> > des >> >> > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] >> >> > ... >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.148 secs (0.077 CPU) initing base buffer >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 6.682 secs (-0.000 CPU) processing `white balance' >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.007 secs (-0.000 CPU) processing `highlight >> >> > reconstruction' [thumbnail] >> >> > ... >> >> > ... >> >> > [export] creating pixelpipe took 0.151 secs (0.173 CPU) >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.072 secs (0.037 CPU) initing base buffer >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 14.433 secs (0.000 CPU) processing `balance des >> >> > blancs' >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.003 secs (0.000 CPU) processing `récupération des >> >> > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] >> >> > ... >> >> > ... >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 1.691 secs (0.255 CPU) initing base buffer >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 5.598 secs (0.010 CPU) processing `balance des >> >> > blancs' >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.007 secs (0.025 CPU) processing `récupération des >> >> > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] >> >> > ... >> >> > .... >> >> > dev_pixelpipe] took 0.000 secs (-0.000 CPU) initing base buffer >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 50.678 secs (26.228 CPU) processing `récupération >> >> > des >> >> > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] >> >> > ... >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.000 secs (0.001 CPU) processing `gamma' >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_process_thumbnail] pixel pipeline processing took 50.703 secs >> >> > (26.311 >> >> > CPU) >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 49.118 secs (24.735 CPU) processing `balance des >> >> > blancs' [thumbnail] >> >> > ... >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 17.581 secs (16.482 CPU) processing `récupération >> >> > des >> >> > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.006 secs (0.035 CPU) processing `dématriçage' >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > ... >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.038 secs (0.055 CPU) processing `récupération des >> >> > hautes lumières' [full] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 20.670 secs (15.234 CPU) processing `balance des >> >> > blancs' [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 21.441 secs (15.708 CPU) processing `balance des >> >> > blancs' [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 2.050 secs (1.508 CPU) processing `récupération des >> >> > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] >> >> > ... >> >> >> But not all the time : >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.017 secs (0.026 CPU) processing `balance des >> >> > blancs' >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 1.520 secs (0.042 CPU) processing `récupération des >> >> > hautes lumières' [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.007 secs (0.034 CPU) processing `dématriçage' >> >> > [thumbnail] >> >> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.015 secs (0.005 CPU) processing `réduction du >> >> > bruit >> >> > (profil)' [thumbnail] >> >> > >> >> > Do you known why ? or it's impact only me ? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> > Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer >> >> > Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013 >> >> > and get the hardware for free! Learn more. >> >> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > darktable-devel mailing list >> >> > [email protected] >> >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-devel >> >> > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ darktable-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-devel
