I run another set of benchmarks using x11perf. I don't know how much they can help in pinpointing the issue(s), but they do show that `metacity --composite` is extremely slower than `metacity --no-composite` or `compiz`.
I'm attaching the output in LibreOffice Calc format, I think it's more readable that way. An example line from the attached .ods file: Test: 500x500 tiled rectangle (17x15 tile) no WM: 772 (100 %) metacity --no-composite: 699 (91%) metacity --composite: 233 (30 %) compiz: 688 (89 %) The numbers are the repetitions, and inside the parentheses are the normalized values, with 100% being the highest. The others are about 90% efficient, while `metacity --composite` is only 30% efficient, three times slower in that test. I can also create a similar .ods for gtkperf, if anyone thinks that it will somehow help. ** Attachment added: "x11perf.ods" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/metacity/+bug/1566157/+attachment/4624852/+files/x11perf.ods -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to metacity in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1566157 Title: Metacity's compositing is too slow To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/metacity/+bug/1566157/+subscriptions -- desktop-bugs mailing list desktop-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/desktop-bugs
