4.2a beta 3 phrase searches take longer than in beta 2

Test searches take longer than before. For example, "the god of this age" takes 60.57 secs in beta 3 but only 33.06 secs in beta 2 (on my system).

Do we need to reindex again for this beta?

According to the release notes, the speed should be better, not worse.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

David Carter

Test searches take longer than before. For example, "the god of this age" takes 60.57 secs in beta 3 but only 33.06 secs in beta 2 (on my system).

Do we need to reindex again for this beta?

According to the release notes, the speed should be better, not worse.

That seems remarkably slow - "the god of this age" just took 12.98 sec in beta 3 on my PC

DominicM

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204472#Comment_204472

swap machines with you Todd??

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204472#Comment_204472

Test searches take longer than before. For example, "the god of this age" takes 60.57 secs in beta 3 but only 33.06 secs in beta 2 (on my system).

Do we need to reindex again for this beta?

According to the release notes, the speed should be better, not worse.

That seems remarkably slow - "the god of this age" just took 12.98 sec in beta 3 on my PC

I have a dual-core laptop. It's not the latest tech. Plus my library has 1959 resources, how many does yours have?.

My main concern is that the stated improvements for this beta seem to be having a negative effect for me... or do I need to re-index for the changes?

David Carter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204488#Comment_204488

I have a dual-core laptop. It's not the latest tech. Plus my library has 1959 resources, how many does yours have?.

My main concern is that the stated improvements for this beta seem to be having a negative effect for me... or do I need to re-index for the changes?

I only have 803 resources. I didn't re-index this time but I did after the last update.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204488#Comment_204488

My results are:

I have about 3,300 resources. I don't have a 4.2a Beta 2 baseline to compare to, but in my 4.2 SR-3 installation the same search took 61.60 seconds. This is a dramatic improvement.

BTW: I also like the new display options.

Robert Pavich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204567#Comment_204567

Todd,

I have a 4 year old Dell core 2 duo with 6gb ram.

Your "the god of this age" search completed in 5.6 seconds for me.

That's acceptable but it doesn't compute why it's really good for me and not for you with similar machines.

EDITED: Changed the ram to 6gb

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204650#Comment_204650

I have been tracking the 5 searches we originally talked about on this issue, and on my machine beta 3 is MUCH faster compared to beta 2:

"look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers" - was 2.76 now 2.14

"prince of the power of the air" - was 7.24 now 2.46

"from age to age the same" - was 14.63 now 5.95

"the god of this age" - was 23.20 now 8.40

""the order of melchizedek" was 2.78 now 1.75

My library is a small bit larger now so there are a few more results too. WELL DONE LOGOS!

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204666#Comment_204666

I have been tracking the 5 searches we originally talked about on this issue, and on my machine beta 3 is MUCH faster compared to beta 2:

"look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers" - was 2.76 now 2.14

"prince of the power of the air" - was 7.24 now 2.46

"from age to age the same" - was 14.63 now 5.95

"the god of this age" - was 23.20 now 8.40

""the order of melchizedek" was 2.78 now 1.75

My library is a small bit larger now so there are a few more results too. WELL DONE LOGOS!

Important note maybe - I did do a full reindex overnight last night after I installed beta 3. I am going to start doing that from now on, it's easy to just start it up and go to bed. Not sure if that helps or not.

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204667#Comment_204667

I was worried about installing beta 3, based on what was posted here. But I did, and I ran the same search, 4 times. Here is how it went (with another in between)

I thought "wow", that was long. I had time to go upstairs, kiss my children good morning, come down, and it was still searching.

Then I ran it again and got this:

better, but still not terrific. Thinking maybe I had "too much going on", I turned off Pandora radio and wondered if that made a difference--whether it affected that time, I don't know. Then I ran it again:

Much faster! I wondered if it was just faster because it was "saving" the search. (yeah, as you know, I am illiterate when it comes to real geeky tech knowledge.

I tried several other searches for other phrases, they were all under 5 seconds, but only had a handful of results, maybe up to 20. Then I tried this one:

wow. really fast. I closed the search window. Then I opened it again and ran the original search:

I don't know what to make of it all, but have at it! [:)]

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204667#Comment_204667

Well, I did a full reindex last night, but it had little effect on the speed.

I have 3GB of RAM, and according to the XP task manager I wasn't exceeding 2.5 GB of total memory usage. But I rebooted my computer to clean up memory.

When I restarted Logos after the reboot, the first phrase search I did (which was in the saved layout) took 45 seconds, but subsequent phrase searches have all taken around 3-10 seconds. Don't know why thy first one took so long, but I'm convinced my problem is fixed.

So I guess the lesson is that fragmented memory can have a deleterious effect on Logos (at least in XP).

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204700#Comment_204700

I was worried about installing beta 3, based on what was posted here. But I did, and I ran the same search, 4 times. Here is how it went (with another in between)

1.

I thought "wow", that was long. I had time to go upstairs, kiss my children good morning, come down, and it was still searching.

Then I ran it again and got this:

better, but still not terrific. Thinking maybe I had "too much going on", I turned off Pandora radio and wondered if that made a difference--whether it affected that time, I don't know. Then I ran it again:

Much faster! I wondered if it was just faster because it was "saving" the search. (yeah, as you know, I am illiterate when it comes to real geeky tech knowledge.

I tried several other searches for other phrases, they were all under 5 seconds, but only had a handful of results, maybe up to 20. Then I tried this one:

wow. really fast. I closed the search window. Then I opened it again and ran the original search:

I don't know what to make of it all, but have at it!

Dan, if you turn Pandora Radio back on, do the search results go way up?

If not, I wonder if you let Pandora Radio run for an hour, does it use a lot of memory which constrains the Logos search time? Are the search times slower in an hour?

Do you know how to see how much memory is used on your system by doing Ctrl-Shift-Esc and clicking on the Performance tab? When it's slow I wonder if it's using a lot more memory...

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204717#Comment_204717

Just ran it:

Pandora had been running for over an hour, and physical memory use was 65%.

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204757#Comment_204757

Hmm. Faster still! So other than the original time when you had all those slow times, it seems to be corrected now...

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204795#Comment_204795

Logos 4 search speed will be improved if the data it's trying to load off disk is already cached in RAM by the OS.

If you have more physical RAM, Windows can use the RAM that's not being used by running programs to cache recently-loaded data. (Even though Logos 4 is limited to about 2GB of RAM because it's a 32-bit process, it can make use of 6GB (or more) of system memory by means of the OS disk cache. If resource files, index files, etc. are cached in RAM by the OS, Logos 4 can benefit from that even though it hasn't directly loaded those bytes into memory itself.)

If you have a newer operating system, it's likely to have smarter cache algorithms that keep data you need in (otherwise unused) memory (e.g., http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2006/09/why-does-vista-use-all-my-memory.html).

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204807#Comment_204807

Logos 4 search speed will be improved if the data it's trying to load off disk is already cached in RAM by the OS.

If you have more physical RAM, Windows can use the RAM that's not being used by running programs to cache recently-loaded data. (Even though Logos 4 is limited to about 2GB of RAM because it's a 32-bit process, it can make use of 6GB (or more) of system memory by means of the OS disk cache. If resource files, index files, etc. are cached in RAM by the OS, Logos 4 can benefit from that even though it hasn't directly loaded those bytes into memory itself.)

If you have a newer operating system, it's likely to have smarter cache algorithms that keep data you need in (otherwise unused) memory (e.g., http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2006/09/why-does-vista-use-all-my-memory.html).

Thanks Bradley. One question - are there advantages/thoughts/plans for making a 64 bit executable of Logos 4?

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204829#Comment_204829

Thanks Bradley. One question - are there advantages/thoughts/plans for making a 64 bit executable of Logos 4?

There are small advantages, e.g., Logos 4 could cache more data in memory without having to worry about OutOfMemoryExceptions. This would only be useful on modern machines with 4GB or more RAM, though.

We don't currently have any plans, mostly due to a number of 3rd-party libraries we use that would have to be ported to 64-bit; at the moment we're not seeing a compelling reason to do so.

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/204884#Comment_204884

Makes sense, thanks for the thoughts!