nice tool, but it only shows me percentage. gprof shows me also number of calls.
Or maybe sysprof also can be customized? BTW: I run it as root and it also shows kernel stuff. Is it something like a dtrace-clone for Linux? Ciao, Oliver On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 07:36:55PM +0200, Adam Dingle wrote: > That's why I recommend sysprof: there's no need to recompile > libraries, your program runs at normal speed and it's really easy to > use as well. I bet that if you install the sysprof package on your > distribution, you could have it working in less time that the 14 > minutes it takes to start Shotwell with gprof! > > adam > > On 08/14/2011 06:54 PM, oliver wrote: > >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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
