Bug: L5 Beta, Windowing Performance and Resize Issues
I have a good desktop machine: AMD Athlon IIx4 640 Processor 3.00 GHz with 8 GB Ram. ATI Radeon HD 5670 Graphics Board.
When I maximize or restore a window it takes 15-20 seconds.
Selecting the corner of the main window and resizing takes several seconds
When I switch into or out of full screen mode it takes 40 to 60 seconds.
I switched into "full screen mode" and though all the other panes were removed except for my reading pane, the window only occupied a small portion of the screen. This was after waiting over a minute.
Comments
-
Luke said:
When I switch into or out of full screen mode it takes 40 to 60 seconds.
This is nowhere close to normal. My system takes 90 seconds to boot to a Logos screen, but switching to full screen mode takes about 1 second.
I'd begin by trying to eliminate software conflicts. I notice on your screen shot that you have several programs running in the background. Does your performance improve when Logos is running without anything else running at the same time?
I see you're running X-Mouse. That's a non-standard application, have you tried running Logos without it?
If you are using any other desktop enhancements, does it help, if they are disabled?
One way to quickly try all the suggestions at once, is to boot to safe mode and see how Logos responds.
Since this could be a display issue, check with your computer manufacturer for video driver updates: (1) If your card came with your computer - do not just go to ATI, if your card was installed by your computer manufacturer). (2) If you bought and installed the card, go to the web site of the card manufacturer, if any brand name other than ATI appeared on the box (e.g., HIS, Logisys, etc.). Note that upgrading from ATI, for a card built by someone other than ATI (even with ATI video chips) can result in chip conflicts that could explain the behavior you're seeing - it happened to me (learned my lesson!).
The final thing to check, and I only mention it last because it seems the least likely, is that if your OS hard drive is full or nearly full, rewriting the swap file may cause delays. This is unlikely, unless you're seeing other delays in Logos, and/or in other programs. As a general rule of thumb, you should have at least 1/3 of your OS drive unused.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
I have not had any of these problems prior to this beta. None of my other programs are having any issues. The full screen not showing as full screen is not a video issue. I did find that if I turn the internet off that the response time is much faster. My network is a bit sketchy here at the church and it appears that screen refresh and network access are impacting one another. Prior to entering the pastorate I was a software developer for 20-years. Having done a good bit of UI development the program seems to be acting as though the network update and the screen update are happening on the same thread. If you could try your test on a slower network I bet you would see it too.
The problem with the full-screen not being full screen seems to occur when I select F11 after re-sizing the window from the corner so that it does not occupy the entire screen. The "full-screen" window then only occupies the region that the initial window occupied.
0 -
Luke said:
Prior to entering the pastorate I was a software developer for 20-years. Having done a good bit of UI development the program seems to be acting as though the network update and the screen update are happening on the same thread. If you could try your test on a slower network I bet you would see it too.
I can't test this, but logs might demonstrate the issue. There are some known issues with this beta, but I don't remember seeing this display issue before. If a display call and a network update are occurring on the same thread this could be an AMD vs. Intel thing, I suppose, but it shouldn't be happening. Did you look at any logs to confirm your suspicions?
If you were a software dev., and have done some UI stuff, my next question would be: Did you make any changes/tweeks to the default Windows UI, system, settings, services, etc.? Sometimes messing around 'under the hood' can have unintended consequences. Logos does expect a default Windows environment. I'm assuming you know more than me about such things, but it had to be asked.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
This problem continues in the new beta as well.
I found another thread that was reporting this same/similar behavior:
http://community.logos.com/forums/t/25931.aspx
The "full screen" reading view occupies the size of the un-maximized window. The performance is also really bad. The window displays for approx. 3-seconds, then will go entirely black for about 20 seconds before repainting correctly.
I saw this initially while the program was indexing, so I paused the indexer and still have the same behavior
My network is not the greatest download about 5Mbps and upload 1Mbps.
There are no errors or exceptions in the logs
I don't want to be disagreeable about this but this problem is not the result of the fact that I use x-mouse, or that I have an AMD processor, or any special display settings, or any other reason that has been suggested. It may be exacerbated by my sub-standard network connection but I would guess that others that desire to use this product would have similar conditions. This is a bug. I'm not looking for excuses, I just want to help logos discover, isolate and correct such issues. Right now reading mode is fairly well useless on my configuration. I just thought that perhaps they might want to know.
0 -
Luke said:
This problem continues in the new beta as well.
Luke said:I'm not looking for excuses, I just want to help logos discover, isolate and correct such issues. Right now reading mode is fairly well useless on my configuration. I just thought that perhaps they might want to know.
If you want to help Logos understand and hopefully solve this, the best way is to submit your logs, as suggested above.
BTW, I would suggest letting your indexer finish, rather than pausing it. That would allow us to rule out any indexing issues (which are one of the major causes of Logos4/5 problems).
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
I looked in the logs and they were empty. I didn't see any reason to submit them.
0 -
Luke said:
I looked in the logs and they were empty. I didn't see any reason to submit them.
The logs that include the behavior you describe (network update and screen update happening on the same thread, e.g.) would be the only way I know of to potentially understand the problem, without a tech getting on your machine remotely and looking around (which may be the best option - see below).
Logs should show the time it takes for an operation to complete and which threads it is using while doing it. The other reason for looking at the logs is to confirm what the problem isn't - it's helpful to know that the indexer completed properly, that the OS is up to date, etc. Ruling out potential problems is an important part of the diagnostic process.
The other thread you pointed to demonstrates a similar issue that was most likely a hardware issue, though the OP decided to drop the case rather than go into details about his hardware configuration. I don't think a hardware issue is likely with your case (given your specs), but it would be good to rule out as well. I'm not sure a log could do that, but it would at least tell us your WPF FPS target (20 FPS?). If your case is a hardware issue, the most likely culprit (IMHO) is a video driver issue.However, for the problem you describe, I don't think it's likely that this can be solved without the involvement of a Logos tech. You can contact them through the 800 number on the Logos web site (by far the best way), or by email (if a phone call is not possible): tech@logos.com. You may refer them to this thread for further information.
EDIT:
Luke said:I looked in the logs and they were empty. I didn't see any reason to submit them.
If you enable logging as described in the wiki above, they shouldn't be empty. I assume you meant to say that they didn't give any useful information. But after my initial response, I thought that might need to be clarified as well.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
Luke said:
I have a good desktop machine: AMD Athlon IIx4 640 Processor 3.00 GHz with 8 GB Ram. ATI Radeon HD 5670 Graphics Board.
When I maximize or restore a window it takes 15-20 seconds.
Wondering about disk speed and activity ? Anti-virus scanning of on demand file access can noticeably slow program performance. May want to add a Solid State Disk (SSD) for Logos use; suggest SATA III models, which tend to have faster transfer rates.
Apologies: on a Windows 7 laptop with Logos 5.0b Beta 2 custom installed on a SSD and indexing complete, unable to replicate window slowness. The Dell 17" laptop has 2.3 GHz i7-3610QM, nVidia GeForce GT 650M, 8 GB Ram, and 1 TB 5400 RPM drive; SSD is a secondary internal drive. Also have 512 MB RAM disk configured for temporary files.
Looking at some CPU charts => http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2012/benchmarks,140.html noticed AMD Athlon IIx4 640 is between the minimum and recommended processors for Logos 5 => http://www.logos.com/support/tech-faq Noted review of ATI Radeon HD 5670 => http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5670,2533.html was posted on 14 Jan 2010. A chart of 2011 entry level graphic cards includes HD 5670 => http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2011-entry-level-graphics/3DMark11,2879.html
Logos 5 is resource intensive – benefits from fast processor ( 2nd or 3rd Generation Intel i5 or i7
), graphics, and quick storage along with adequate memory (i.e. newer hardware since Logos 5 being designed for use over 5 to 8 years); Solid State Disk (SSD) is noticeably faster than hard disk.Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Thanks for this information. Looking at the resource monitor it does seem that my disk is the bottle-neck, the processor and memory don't seemed to be taxed. I have a 1TB, 7200 RPM drive, 1/3 full, but it isn't an SSD, it seems like it should carry the load but maybe the indexing was getting me. I'll pay closer attention.
0
