From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: another example of org being slow, with some analysis Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:53:55 -0400 Message-ID: <87k2uz953g.fsf@pierrot.dokosmarshall.org> References: <87ioalhtfa.fsf@delle7240.chemeng.ucl.ac.uk> <87vbekc1iy.fsf@alphaville.usersys.redhat.com> <877fr0w78d.fsf@gelnhausen.dvs.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> <87wpz016gd.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38761) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5wkK-0003zI-5Y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:54:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5wkF-00056G-3Q for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:54:16 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:59005) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5wkE-000563-Td for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:54:11 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5wk9-0000lQ-1K for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:54:05 +0200 Received: from pool-108-20-41-47.bstnma.fios.verizon.net ([108.20.41.47]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:54:05 +0200 Received: from ndokos by pool-108-20-41-47.bstnma.fios.verizon.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:54:05 +0200 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-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Eric S Fraga 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