From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Welle Subject: Re: working with tables can be quite painful... Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 14:58:01 +0200 Message-ID: <8760psm4h2.fsf@luisa.c0t0d0s0.de> References: <87r38jew14.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <9ae6591e2754413885a96e19c2455472@HE1PR01MB1898.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> <87zin4z3u3.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35877) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bly9A-0007s8-8T for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 08:58:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bly96-0003oI-4K for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 08:58:07 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:62514) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bly95-0003nf-R2 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 08:58:04 -0400 Received: from stella.c0t0d0s0.de ([88.66.7.109]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MJmcS-1bksDW0h1Q-0019h9 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 14:58:02 +0200 Received: from Stella (stella.c0t0d0s0.de [192.168.42.1]) by stella.c0t0d0s0.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AE08C4264 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 14:58:01 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <87zin4z3u3.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> (Eric S. Fraga's message of "Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:33:24 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Eric S Fraga writes: > On Saturday, 17 Sep 2016 at 08:48, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > > [...] > >> Could you send a profiler report so that I can get a better glimpse on >> what part of `org-table-align' is lagging? > > Hi Nicolas, > > this morning, working on the same table is much less painful. I've run > the profile and did some movements and changes to the table and here is > the output from the profiler (I can send you the full report if you > wish). > > I know that if I narrow the buffer to just the section (headline and > contents) that contains the table, the performance is > better. Anecdotally, it would seem that the performance degrades over > time so I wonder if there is a cache issue? the output of your profiler run doesn't ring a bell, but a few years ago I had the problem that after some uptime (my Emacs uptime is typical several days, up to a few weeks) Org operations like building the agenda became sloooow. Restarting Emacs fixed that, until the problem occurred again after some time. If I remember correctly I asked the list for advise. But it looked like one of these problems only I have ;). Maybe some other lisp package had its hands in the game, I don't know. Eventually, after some Emacs, Org and other updates the problem was gone. As I said, I don't think, you suffer from the same problem. But you said you don't use the newest software versions, so just in case. Regards hmw