Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
Locked
12
12
Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
 
|
Hi, I recently downloaded the latest Pharo Dev and Web images, and also the 2.8.4 one-click (which seems to be based on the Pharo image and VM too). And I found out that its performance is terrible, it takes forever (you perceive the delay) to open a browser, browse senders, change a method selection on the OB or even do a "print-it" on a workspace.
However when accessing seaside through the web UI, it's blazing fast. Which makes me think there is something which is not working as it should. As a side note, I downloaded the latest Cuis image from http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html, and its amazingly fast.
¿Am I missing something? Best regards, Esteban A. Maringolo _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
take the core image.
The default tools in web dev are too slow right now. Stef On Jul 13, 2009, at 11:05 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo wrote: > Hi, > > I recently downloaded the latest Pharo Dev and Web images, and also > the 2.8.4 one-click (which seems to be based on the Pharo image and > VM too). > > And I found out that its performance is terrible, it takes forever > (you perceive the delay) to open a browser, browse senders, change a > method selection on the OB or even do a "print-it" on a workspace. > > However when accessing seaside through the web UI, it's blazing > fast. Which makes me think there is something which is not working > as it should. > > As a side note, I downloaded the latest Cuis image from http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html > , and its amazingly fast. > > ¿Am I missing something? > > > Best regards, > > Esteban A. Maringolo > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Stéphane
Ducasse<[hidden email]> wrote: > take the core image. > The default tools in web dev are too slow right now. Maybe we should point that out somewhere as we promote the dev-images as being "Pharo"? As we can see from some of the discussion on the Squeak list people then think Pharo in general is dog slow... Michael _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
>>
> > Maybe we should point that out somewhere as we promote the dev-images > as being "Pharo"? > As we can see from some of the discussion on the Squeak list people > then think Pharo in general is dog slow... easy for them. Damien could you start to make pharo-dev having less tools and that we see what is the default UI? David is working on a new version of the browser but in case of speed problem we should probably use the one of lukas. Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Esteban A. Maringolo
Hi estaban
> I recently downloaded the latest Pharo Dev and Web images, and also > the 2.8.4 one-click (which seems to be based on the Pharo image and > VM too). > > And I found out that its performance is terrible, it takes forever > (you perceive the delay) to open a browser, browse senders, change a > method selection on the OB or even do a "print-it" on a workspace. > > However when accessing seaside through the web UI, it's blazing > fast. Which makes me think there is something which is not working > as it should. PackageInfo and the package browser are slow. We are working on that. We removed recently the package annotation in the senders (because they scan all the image because of package info implementation) but we need this information to curve out etoys. You can take the default browser or the browser of lukas to get a much faster experience. > > As a side note, I downloaded the latest Cuis image from http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html > , and its amazingly fast. > As a side note. We do not consider ourselves in competition with Cuis. We integrated more than 1500 bug fixes and improvements (pragmas, closure compiler, traits....) and even more if we consider the version used in Cuis. We support truetype fonts and we are cleaning the system, when the cruft will be removed we will probably focus on making it faster. We are rewriting Package info from scratch. Now it takes time but feel free to join. Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Esteban A. Maringolo
> And I found out that its performance is terrible, it takes forever (you
> perceive the delay) to open a browser, browse senders, change a method > selection on the OB or even do a "print-it" on a workspace. I use images that have the same tools loaded as the Seaside One-Click image for all my development (see the load script <http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/ImageBuildScripts>). I find it pretty snappy, however I use the standard Squeak look: UIThemeStandardSqueak beCurrent Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Michael Rueger-6
We really need to change this situation.
As Lukas pointed out, its not the OmniBrowser implementation that is slow. There are some extended features of OmniBrowser that use computation intensive or inefficient parts of the system like PackageInfo. I really appreciate all these cool new features, but if they make the browser slow, they defeat the whole purpose. Users don't know the details and they don't care. If they open a Pharo image and its slow, then this just gives a bad impression. If people start telling each other "Pharo is slow", we will loose reputation that is very hard to win back. So I suggest to either disable the features that make the browser slow so that it is snappy again or to replace it with the version Lukas is using until it is fast enough. Cheers, Adrian On Jul 14, 2009, at 11:49 , Michael Rueger wrote: > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Stéphane > Ducasse<[hidden email]> wrote: >> take the core image. >> The default tools in web dev are too slow right now. > > Maybe we should point that out somewhere as we promote the dev-images > as being "Pharo"? > As we can see from some of the discussion on the Squeak list people > then think Pharo in general is dog slow... > > Michael > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
Adrian Lienhard pravi:
> We really need to change this situation. > > As Lukas pointed out, its not the OmniBrowser implementation that is > slow. There are some extended features of OmniBrowser that use > computation intensive or inefficient parts of the system like > PackageInfo. I really appreciate all these cool new features, but if > they make the browser slow, they defeat the whole purpose. > > Users don't know the details and they don't care. If they open a Pharo > image and its slow, then this just gives a bad impression. If people > start telling each other "Pharo is slow", we will loose reputation > that is very hard to win back. > > So I suggest to either disable the features that make the browser slow > so that it is snappy again or to replace it with the version Lukas is > using until it is fast enough. I agree completely with Adrian here. Please switch off those dynamic category features and similar until they will run efficiently. Current impression speed-wise is actually very bad and only for the people with strong nerves. But for competition with other Smalltalks, no chance! And a chance with 1.0 release will be lost in a reputation you'll improve back very hard. JAnko > On Jul 14, 2009, at 11:49 , Michael Rueger wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Stéphane >> Ducasse<[hidden email]> wrote: >>> take the core image. >>> The default tools in web dev are too slow right now. >> Maybe we should point that out somewhere as we promote the dev-images >> as being "Pharo"? >> As we can see from some of the discussion on the Squeak list people >> then think Pharo in general is dog slow... >> >> Michael -- Janko Mivšek AIDA/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Adrian Lienhard
Yes david is working on that.
I removed the package in senders and 'm working on a replacement for Package info (but not for tomorrow), Stef On Jul 14, 2009, at 12:30 PM, Adrian Lienhard wrote: > We really need to change this situation. > > As Lukas pointed out, its not the OmniBrowser implementation that is > slow. There are some extended features of OmniBrowser that use > computation intensive or inefficient parts of the system like > PackageInfo. I really appreciate all these cool new features, but if > they make the browser slow, they defeat the whole purpose. > > Users don't know the details and they don't care. If they open a Pharo > image and its slow, then this just gives a bad impression. If people > start telling each other "Pharo is slow", we will loose reputation > that is very hard to win back. > > So I suggest to either disable the features that make the browser slow > so that it is snappy again or to replace it with the version Lukas is > using until it is fast enough. > > > Cheers, > Adrian > > > On Jul 14, 2009, at 11:49 , Michael Rueger wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Stéphane >> Ducasse<[hidden email]> wrote: >>> take the core image. >>> The default tools in web dev are too slow right now. >> >> Maybe we should point that out somewhere as we promote the dev-images >> as being "Pharo"? >> As we can see from some of the discussion on the Squeak list people >> then think Pharo in general is dog slow... >> >> Michael >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Adrian Lienhard
.
+9999999999999999999999999999 I recommend Pharo to a lot of people that was using Squeak and this is the first thing they told me and the first thing that happens. It doesn't matter how many fixes you did, or closures or traits. If you open a browser and takes 1 seconds. You close it. You even don't see all of the real features. And as Andrian says, they doesn't know why it is slow, or how to have a faster Pharo . They don't know what to remove or whateever. Please, we are loosing gays for this topic.
As I said, +999999999999999999999
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Hi Stef,
2009/7/14 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: > Hi estaban [SNIP] >> As a side note, I downloaded the latest Cuis image from http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html >> , and its amazingly fast. > As a side note. We do not consider ourselves in competition with Cuis. > We integrated more than 1500 bug fixes and improvements (pragmas, > closure compiler, traits....) and even more if we consider the version > used in Cuis. I know you're not competition, just put the example as a comparison of how fast a minimum image can run on actual hardware. I know Pharo is a superior alternative, with not only speed in mind. And I like its objective. > We support truetype fonts and we are cleaning the system, when the > cruft will be removed we will probably focus on making it faster. I understand, it just surprised me that an alpha release was such slow, as somebody said below its simple dissuasive to "give Pharo a try now it's alpha" and find that. > We are rewriting Package info from scratch. > Now it takes time but feel free to join. I hope to contribute with something, even if it's just a bug report/fix. Regards, -- Esteban. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
Hi all,
2009/7/14 Mariano Martinez Peck <[hidden email]>: >> Users don't know the details and they don't care. If they open a Pharo >> image and its slow, then this just gives a bad impression. If people >> start telling each other "Pharo is slow", we will loose reputation >> that is very hard to win back. > +9999999999999999999999999999 +1 to that. > I recommend Pharo to a lot of people that was using Squeak and this is the > first thing they told me and the first thing that happens. It doesn't matter > how many fixes you did, or closures or traits. If you open a browser and > takes 1 seconds. You close it. You even don't see all of the real features. > And as Andrian says, they doesn't know why it is slow, or how to have a > faster Pharo . They don't know what to remove or whateever. > > Please, we are loosing gays for this topic. An guys too ;-) >> So I suggest to either disable the features that make the browser slow >> so that it is snappy again or to replace it with the version Lukas is >> using until it is fast enough. > > As I said, +999999999999999999999 +1 Regards, -- Esteban. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi all, hehehehe sorry. You understood me :)
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> Hi estaban > > >> I recently downloaded the latest Pharo Dev and Web images, and also >> the 2.8.4 one-click (which seems to be based on the Pharo image and >> VM too). >> >> And I found out that its performance is terrible, it takes forever >> (you perceive the delay) to open a browser, browse senders, change a >> method selection on the OB or even do a "print-it" on a workspace. >> >> However when accessing seaside through the web UI, it's blazing >> fast. Which makes me think there is something which is not working >> as it should. >> > > PackageInfo and the package browser are slow. in MC1.5 Keith _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
Ok we will fix that for 1.0
right now we are not even in beta. Stef > Users don't know the details and they don't care. If they open a Pharo > image and its slow, then this just gives a bad impression. If people > start telling each other "Pharo is slow", we will loose reputation > that is very hard to win back. > > +9999999999999999999999999999 > > I recommend Pharo to a lot of people that was using Squeak and this > is the first thing they told me and the first thing that happens. It > doesn't matter how many fixes you did, or closures or traits. If you > open a browser and takes 1 seconds. You close it. You even don't see > all of the real features. And as Andrian says, they doesn't know why > it is slow, or how to have a faster Pharo . They don't know what to > remove or whateever. > > Please, we are loosing gays for this topic. > > > > So I suggest to either disable the features that make the browser slow > so that it is snappy again or to replace it with the version Lukas is > using until it is fast enough. > > As I said, +999999999999999999999 > > > > > Cheers, > Adrian > > > On Jul 14, 2009, at 11:49 , Michael Rueger wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Stéphane > > Ducasse<[hidden email]> wrote: > >> take the core image. > >> The default tools in web dev are too slow right now. > > > > Maybe we should point that out somewhere as we promote the dev- > images > > as being "Pharo"? > > As we can see from some of the discussion on the Squeak list people > > then think Pharo in general is dog slow... > > > > Michael > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > [hidden email] > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: Pharo-Dev/web Image slowness
|
|
In reply to this post by Esteban A. Maringolo
Thanks esteban.
> Hi Stef, > > 2009/7/14 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >> Hi estaban > [SNIP] > >>> As a side note, I downloaded the latest Cuis image from http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html >>> , and its amazingly fast. > >> As a side note. We do not consider ourselves in competition with >> Cuis. >> We integrated more than 1500 bug fixes and improvements (pragmas, >> closure compiler, traits....) and even more if we consider the >> version >> used in Cuis. > > I know you're not competition, just put the example as a comparison of > how fast a minimum image can run on actual hardware. > > I know Pharo is a superior alternative, with not only speed in mind. > And I like its objective. > >> We support truetype fonts and we are cleaning the system, when the >> cruft will be removed we will probably focus on making it faster. > > I understand, it just surprised me that an alpha release was such > slow, as somebody said below its simple dissuasive to "give Pharo a > try now it's alpha" and find that. > >> We are rewriting Package info from scratch. >> Now it takes time but feel free to join. > > I hope to contribute with something, even if it's just a bug report/ > fix. > > Regards, > > > -- > Esteban. > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by keith1y
Dear Keith
Can you please specify what's the proper way to update Monticello? Is there a way to do it without the Installer package? If the Installer package is really a must for updating Monticello, can you point what is the right way to install the Installer? Does the same procedure work equally for 3.9, 3.10 and Pharo images? Thanks in advance Hernán 2009/7/14 Keith Hodges <[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
I mean Monticello/PackageInfo
Hernán 2009/7/14 Hernán Morales Durand <[hidden email]> Dear Keith _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by hernanmd
Hernán Morales Durand wrote:
> Dear Keith > Can you please specify what's the proper way to update Monticello? > Is there a way to do it without the Installer package? If the > Installer package is really a must for updating Monticello, can you > point what is the right way to install the Installer? Does the same > procedure work equally for 3.9, 3.10 and Pharo images? > Thanks in advance > > Hernán See previous email. Also Universes has an entry for Monticello1.5 and 1.6 Installer can load the source.st file from a mcz, this is needed to load Monticello. All the scripts for loading Monticello into various images are in InstallerScripts. Keith _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
So, please correct me if I am wrong:
1) The most secure cross-fork way to update Monticello for clean images is HTTPSocket httpFileIn: 'ftp.squeak.org/3.11/scripts/LPF.st'. 2) Installer is necessary to update Monticello to 1.5 or 1.6 3) It is well-know that packages like OmniBrowser doesn't load after this update is done? (at least in Squeak images) See http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7369 Hernán 2009/7/14 Keith Hodges <[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |