Re: another example of org being slow, with some analysis

[Nick Dokos <ndokos@gmail.com>]

Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> writes:

> On Friday, 19 Jun 2015 at 08:19, Daniel Bausch wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Line 6000 is indeed quite "lame".  I have similar problems like Eric.  A
>> table recalculation at line 43868 takes about a minute at my quite fast
>> machine.  I also tracked that down to org-current-line.  One interesting
>> detail is that this depends on the buffer encoding.  With ASCII the
>> recalculation takes less than a second, with utf-8 about a minute.
>
> Adding some data: my table is at line 8438 in the buffer but character
> position 398345 (I have very long lines as I use visual-line-mode in org
> exclusively with org-indent).  I do use utf-8 encoding.
>
> I have just tried updating the table on a different laptop (i7-2760, 8
> cores, 8 GB RAM, Ubuntu) and it was very fast.  
>
> The two laptops are running different versions of emacs (tracking latest
> emacs developments on Ubuntu and Debian testing lead to different
> versions unfortunately) so my gut feeling is that there is an emacs
> issue here and possibly one related to utf-8 as Daniel suggests.
>
> I'll try to do more instrumenting on my other laptop when I get a
> chance.
>
What is the setting of cache-long-scans you are using? Does it differ
on the two laptops?

Ivan Andrus suggested setting it to nil, but it seems that for this
case, leaving it at t (the default) should be much faster. But there
may be a bug in the cache code.

-- 
Nick