On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 02:18:47AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 03:25:36AM +0200, Bernard Jungen wrote: > > > True. Then please send me a testdoc with files and I'll see. > > > > Here they are (very small): > > http://home.euphonynet.be/bjung/test_quick_save.odt > > http://home.euphonynet.be/bjung/big.png > > OK, so this "takes long to save" story is more a "consumes CPU" one. > > I mean, OK, cpu usage goes up to over 80% from the baseline of ~50 I had > and on the second etc. save it stayed more or less the same around that > 50, but the actual save in OOo is still quick (or appears to be while > doing stuff in the background), no? > > In the latter case: why is this not "minor" then? :)
With all due respect, I'm really amazed at the lack of common sense displayed in your response. You're not a newbie at OOo and computer stuff, are you? First, your machine is probably too fast for this specific test. I don't (and am not supposed to) know how you measure CPU usage and how many GHz and cores it has, but here on a single-core 2.2 Ghz K8 (a reasonably fast machine IMO), the "slow" save takes ~4 seconds, with CPU usage at 100%, and actually blocks OOo while doing it. "Quick" save takes less than 0.25 second. Significant difference. A good tester is aware of his hardware and its potential effects on tests. Second, the test just intends to prove that images are loaded, while keeping the test file sizes small. But imagine (or actually try) a document with 10 times more images and whose file sizes are several megabytes each (i.e. real images that require much more CPU power than blank ones). In that case, not only does CPU usage dramatically goes up while loading them, but I/O activity (and the consequent memory thrashing) too. Anyone who already wrote serious OOo documents containing print-quality images has a good idea of resource consumption when OOo handles images. In this special case, all that waste of resources is unnecessary, and may be a pain depending on machine power and document kind. Is the problem clear now? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-openoffice-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100524001403.gf4...@euphonynet.be
