Parallel Resources dropdown in serious need of optimization
I just timed it: it takes 27 seconds for this dropdown to populate on my computer. Even the second time it still takes 10. That is far too long!
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
Comments
-
I guess you have in excess of 4000 resources, but how many collections have you ticked for use in Parallel Resources and how many collections appear in your 27s example (a screen shot would help).
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
fgh said:
I just timed it: it takes 27 seconds for this dropdown to populate on my computer. Even the second time it still takes 10. That is far too long!
Tried with with several resources from varied collections. With 7k+ resources. All took less than 5 seconds to fully populate.
Mac OS 10.8.4 27" iMac 3.4 GHz i7 with 24 GB RAM. What are your specs?
0 -
I have a lot of Collections, and I have well over 10,000 resources. Maybe this is a Mac issue, as on Win 7 x64, I pulled up Job 3.1 in a Bible, opened NAC:Job which belongs to two collections which will appear in parallel resources dropdown, and it came up in less than 3 seconds.
0 -
Don Awalt said:
Maybe this is a Mac issue
Not a Mac issue. See my post just above yours.
fgh: Do you have a lot of collections selected to show in parallel resources? Other than that, can't think of a cause.
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
how many collections appear in your 27s example (a screen shot would help)
Only for you, since you like screenshots so much[:D]:
Jack Caviness said:What are your specs?
Look in my signature.[;)]
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
I have the same symptoms that fgh has. I'm on a PC laptop, running Windows 7 with an I7-2670 processor and 8GB of memory. I have 4,300 resources in my library and about 50 collections marked to show in parallel resources. It used to work fine, but has been slow since around or a little after the first 5.1 beta.
I often have the same problem when selecting a Bible in a Bible search and also when selecting a Bible in the Text Comparison.
0 -
Tim Hensler said:
I have the same symptoms that fgh has. I'm on a PC laptop, running Windows 7 with an I7-2670 processor
Very interesting! That means no one can blame my old Mac.
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
fgh said:Tim Hensler said:
I have the same symptoms that fgh has. I'm on a PC laptop, running Windows 7 with an I7-2670 processor
Very interesting! That means no one can blame my old Mac.
And I don't think it is related to v5.1 as I get my bible parallel resources inside 3 seconds after opening a tab. It would be worthwhile having a look at your logos.log immediately after reproducing your issue (start Logos with Command key to generate it).
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
It would be worthwhile having a look at your logos.log immediately after reproducing your issue
Dave, would that be the LogosError.log file from C:\Users\Tim\Documents\Logos Log Files on my PC? I'll try to post it here tonight.
0 -
Tim Hensler said:
Dave, would that be the LogosError.log
No - it's the Logos.log file! It has to be generated in the way I indicated (hold CTRL key down as you start Logos in Windows).
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Log file attached.
- Launched Logos with blank layout
- Opened NASB
- Clicked parallel Resource Set
- When the list finally loaded, selected HCSB
- Exited Logos.
0 -
Resource collections that use "*" in their filter string are extremely expensive to evaluate. You have a collection with the rule "* ANDNOT type:("Bible Commentary","Bible Notes","Bible")" that takes 27s to evaluate in the current version of Logos 5.
You will probably see a dramatic performance increase if you replace "*" with "rating:>=0".
0 -
Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:
You will probably see a dramatic performance increase if you replace "*" with "rating:>=0".
Thank you, Bradley. I found two collections with an asterisk in them. Changed both and performance is much better.
0 -
Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:
You will probably see a dramatic performance increase if you replace "*" with "rating:>=0".
Bradley,
This further makes the case for a dedicated "not" operator. It's completely artificial to have to explicitly include all resources with some kind of wildcard expression (either "*" or "rating:>=0") simply to be able to get to the "ANDNOT" operator.
Either "NOT type:("Bible Commentary","Bible Notes","Bible")" or something like "type!:("Bible Commentary","Bible Notes","Bible")" (not the exclamation mark before the colon) ought to achieve the intended resuls without the superfluous universal expression.
Donnie
0 -
[Y]Donnie Hale said:case for a dedicated "not" operator.
0
