RT5 and speed query

(Morgan Hardwood) #41

Before @Dariusz_Duma adds it and we potentially end up with variously optimized builds - @heckflosse @floessie what is the verdict on this? Should it be -o2 or -o3?

@RawConvert it’s not “zero-three” it’s “oscar-three”.

(Ingo Weyrich) #42

It should be -o3!

(Andrew) #43

Thanks, I stand c0rrected.
Seriously though, this is all great stuff. Sincere thanks to all involved, from one of many who will benefit.


FYI! RT5 on Xubuntu 16.04, 64 bit, I3 with 16GB ram… Doing anything seemed a little sluggish. When I tried to adjust the white balance temperature, it worked for 3 to 4 seconds and then RT crashed. I went back to the unstable version. I’ll try Dariusz Dumas updated version when I see it available.

(Morgan Hardwood) #45

@gwaugh http://rawpedia.pixls.us/index.php/How_to_write_useful_bug_reports
Report a bug with a stack backtrace, don’t just complain about it and downgrade - that doesn’t help.


I tried Dariusz Dumas new version in his PPA (5.0-2dhor~xenial). The interface seems less sluggish. But I can still make RT5 crash. Load any jpg file and adjust the white balance temperature up and down a large amount repeatedly and it will eventually crash. I will do what I can to enter a bug report on github. As far as I know there are no debug builds available.

Issue #3650

(Flössie) #47

@heckflosse Why, yes! I guess we’re all waiting for @Morgan_Hardwood to start the development branch so that we have a base for the coming feature branches. :wink:

Sure. And preferably with a capital “Oscar”. And please no -Ofast, because that enables -ffast-math again.

(Andrew) #48

I opened a jpg with RT5 (have not updated yet, version as at weekend) and moved the white balance back and forth lots, and quickly, but it wouldn’t crash.


@RawConvert What version of Ubuntu are you using?

(Andrew) #50

It’s 16.10. I’ve just repeated the white balance check with the new RT5.0 (with O3 set) and the same, can’t make it crash.

@Dariusz_Duma, Many Thanks for the new version. My test is down from 19s to about 5.5s :relaxed:


Thanks Andrew! I wonder what the difference may be between my 16.04.1 LTS version and your version. It could explain a few things.

(Andrew) #52

Is your BIOS up to date?


@RawConvert Actually, my two computers use UEFI and were up to date when I built them. The motherboard manufactures website showed compatibility with my CPU and ram. Considering how stable these two machines have been, I have no reason to believe that the UEFI is at fault.

I’m thinking the problem may be with GTK3. I have used many versions of rawtherapee-unstable from Dariusz Dumas PPA and have not had a failure. The unstable packages appear to be built on the Master branch which appears to use GTK2.

Since you are using a newer release of Ubuntu, your shared libraries may be updated. This could be another reason.

(Stefan Chirila) #54

perhaps GTK2 shouldn’t get dropped in RawTherapee 5 until most distros are able to deal with it properly. I’ve never has a GTK3 version work fast on my system …but that’s cause mine doesn’t count being Debian and outdated :stuck_out_tongue: but if even the Ubuntu avant gardes are having issues I think it’s settled :stuck_out_tongue:

(Ingo Weyrich) #55

I can confirm that gtk3 builds of rt need more time to start (I’m on Win7/64 gtk 3.18). But the processing speed (measured in queue processing) is not different to gtk2 builds. Also, once an image is opened in editor I see no difference in speed between gtk2 and gtk3 when changing processing parameters

(Stefan Chirila) #56

I do sadly. then again i run debian with gtk2 …not sure about gtk3 support on it. but can confirm things run slow; from loading of images to applying changes :frowning: maybe its just a matter of debian getting things together :stuck_out_tongue:

(Morgan Hardwood) #57

I can confirm what @heckflosse wrote on various laptops, using Gentoo and Sabayon.