Ole, That indeed doesn't sound like expected behavior. A few questions before we can diagnose what's going on: when you say "adding a second threshold to the first slows things down heavily, even though threshold 2 is not rendered", can you explain what do you mean by that? Here what I did: selected the Threshold1 in the PIpeline Browser and created nother Threshold (leaving values as default). I haven't hit Apply yet, since as soon as I do, ParaVIew will show Threshold2's output. At this point, I don't see any change in rendering/update times. If I hit "Apply", Threshold2 executes and hence the Update takes time, as expected. At this point, if I hide "Threshold2" and turn on "Threshold1", the first render is a little slower since the representation is regenerating the geometry for Threshold1 -- that's indeed a bug and we'll track that down. Subsequent renders, however, seem unaffected. What am I doing wrong?
Utkarsh On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:11 AM Ole Numssen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello there, > > I'm experiencing some strange performance/timing differences when creating > animations with paraview 5.5.2 on Ubuntu 16.04 for different filter > combinations. > > I think I've broken it down to a minimal example. It seems to be of > importance, if the rendered Filter has a child-filter or not, independent of > this child filter being rendered. > I've taken some timings for a 2-frame animation to make things clear. I've > attached the complete Timer Log output for the 4 different setups shown below. > > Filters shown as in the pipeline browser. I've loaded an .xdmf/.hdf5 file, > Multi-block and Multi-pice Dataset, ~8.5M Cells, ~2MPoints on a i7-4770K CPU > @ 3.50GH 4 core machine, 24G Ram, Titan XP gpu. > > 1) quite fast at first > file.xdmf (not rendered) > | Threshold 1 (rendered) > > -> Frame 1: 0.00056 seconds > -> Frame 2: 0.000385 seconds > > 2) adding a second threshold to the first slows things down heavily, even > though threshold 2 is not rendered. > file.xdmf (not rendered) > | Threshold 1 (rendered) > -| Threshold 2 (not rendered) > > -> Frame 1: 10.1624 seconds > -> Frame 2: 10.1568 seconds > > > 3) deleting threshold 2 speeds things up a little (only frame 2) > file.xdmf (not rendered) > | Threshold 1 (rendered) > -| Threshold 2 (not rendered) > > -> Frame 1: 0.000553 seconds > -> Frame 2: 9.87154 seconds > > > 4) deleting threshold 1 and creating it again leads to fast animation again: > file.xdmf (not rendered) > | Threshold 1 (rendered) > > -> Frame 1: 0.000475 seconds > -> Frame 2: 0.000489 seconds > > > Is this the intended behavior? At least for me it is not the expected > behavior, as the rendered image/data is exactly the same for all of the 4 > states shown above. > > Cheers, > Ole_______________________________________________ > Powered by www.kitware.com > > ParaView discussion is moving! Please visit https://discourse.paraview.org/ > for future posts. > > Visit other Kitware open-source projects at > http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html > > Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: > http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView > > Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView > > Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: > https://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com ParaView discussion is moving! Please visit https://discourse.paraview.org/ for future posts. Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: https://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
