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.


#44

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.


#46

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.


#49

@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:


#51

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?


#53

@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.