Hello Adam, thanks for adding the 100k pics issue as ticket.
I may try also with sysprof later; I did not used that tool so far. So I will stay with gprof at least for a while, which I already used, even it's a while ago. Recompiling the libraries also for debugging/profiling is the effort I try to avoid, as far as possible. I already started debugging, but it seems that shotwell is hanging, when compiled for profiling/debugging . But no, it just finished while I write this mail. So it just needs much time... Just starting and closing took 14 minutes! I will present my results in a seperate mail soon. Ciao, Oliver On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 09:45:39AM +0200, Adam Dingle wrote: > Oliver, > > thanks for being brave enough to try Shotwell with 100K photos and > for reporting performance numbers in your previous email. As you've > pointed out, Shotwell doesn't yet scale nicely to libraries of this > size. In most of our testing at Yorba we haven't gone much beyond > 10K photos, though we've certainly had reports of individual users > with 30K or more. You're the first user I know of to try 100K. :) > > And yes, we should make Shotwell more scalable to larger libraries. > I've created a ticket to track progress on this: > > http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/3980 > > For profiling, I highly recomend sysprof: > > http://sysprof.com/ > http://live.gnome.org/Sysprof > > The huge advantage of sysprof over other profilers (such as gprof) > is that you don't need a special profiling build of your program and > that your program runs at normal speed. You will need to build with > debug symbols, however, and you should also install debug symbols > for glib, libc and GTK. We've used sysprof for all our performance > optimization work in Shotwell so far. > > To build Shotwell with debug symbols, run 'configure --debug' before > you run make. > > adam > > On 08/13/2011 01:57 PM, Andreas Brauchli wrote: > >hi oliver > > > >what you want is probably not a debug version but a > >profilable version. btw, it looks like the debug flag (-g) is passed by > >default - at least if the packager didn't turn it off. > > > >for profiling you can use gprof to do the job by passing -X -pg to valac > >(VALAFLAGS in Makefile) > > > >however if you're not comfortable with c programming i would not advise > >you to do so.. not that you could break much but it could be > >frustrating ;) at least you'd need to read up on how to use gprof > > > >cheers and best of luck > >andreas > > > >On Sam, 2011-08-13 at 13:33 +0200, oliver wrote: > >>If it is possible to create a gdb-/debugging-version > >>of shotwell, and if this is easy by just adding > >>a switch to one makefile, I could try the same > >>procedure again, so that the bottleneck maybe > >>can be identified. > >> > >>Is there an easy way for this? > >> > >>How would I make a debugging version from shotwell? > >> > >>(Or are those issues already addressed by the shotwell team? > >> Or is being able to handle about 100k pics not in the focus > >> of the shotwell team?) > >> > >> > >>Ciao, > >> Oliver > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Shotwell mailing list > >>[email protected] > >>http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Shotwell mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell > > _______________________________________________ > Shotwell mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
