Problem solved. Or did I? At first, I was baffled what was consuming 60% of one of my four cpus, as shown by system monitor. System monitor itself was 10%.
So I increased the number of columns to display in system monitor. The d-bus daemon usage for that cpu went up to 80%. I tried to exit from system monitor. It won't exit. I had to kill system monitor with system monitor. Being an ancient unix admin/programmer, I began to doubt the programming finesse of new-fangled programmers. I used top. To my surprise, top showed my top process using only 2%. Something is wrong with top. Or with system monitor. I fired up system monitor next to top. Immediately, d-bus daemon started to show up on top at 64% and system monitor at 2nd position of 8%. I killed system monitor and top again showed top process using only 2%. Congratulations, system monitor and authors -- you managed to redefine effective programming -- from an old school programmer. To be fair, dbus-monitor was showing gnome-system-monitor spewing globs of messages in text that appears to be scripts instantiating arrays. Using scripts and passing scripts around like a localised script-rpc in a windowing system? Just because you could use the desktop bus to pass scripts or passing script-based data structures around appears elegant does not mean you should do it. The desktop is not a REST service, for goodness' sake. I have a strong impression that gnome-system-monitor is not the only guilty party in this erroneous attitude in the new fangled hi falutin script structure passing orgy party in the linux realm. In fact, the whole gnome desktop is passing these inefficient data structures around. The menu system, the email system, the Mozilla browser, etc. Holy Moly, please stop this json/xml madness. This is a desktop UI where endian issues are not encountered by using C structs, because they are compiled to the local machine. And even if you wish use the d-bus across two architecturally incompatible machines, you should provide it as a different option, so as not to cripple the performance of 99.6% of all normal users. And even so, you should use some ancient-but-established ONC XDR technologies. Perhaps, my opinions are too strong, and may be a tad technologically off-centred - so, I beg your pardon, but y'all should know what I mean here. C'mon people, get back to using C and binary data structures. Before linux sinks beneath microsoft. There is no cross-architecture compatibility issues to overcome, within a desktop bus. Or have programmers forgotten how to use a C struct? May be, y'all should consider using Qt/C++. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/680444 Title: dbus-daemon eats 100% cpu and is not responsive To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dbus/+bug/680444/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
