Official Logos for Mac Representative

There has been several questions as of late concerning which Mac computer to buy to run Logos. I have seen several Logos users give conflicting information concerning the number of cores/threads that Logos utilizes. Can we get an official answer from Logos concerning the following questions:

On a Mac (Mono) for Logos 5

1) How many cores and threads does the indexer use?

2) How many cores and threads does the general program (non-indexing) use?

3) Are the answers to 1) and 2) different for Windows? (i.e., in Windows does Logos use more cores/threads)

4) If Windows uses more cores/threads, will running Logos in virtualization on a Mac result in the extra resources being used?

5) If Windows uses more cores/threads, will running Logos in bootcamp on a Mac result in the extra resources being used?

Thanks for your help!!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

Unofficial observations: number of cores used by Indexer varies. When resource files are being indexed, threads can run in parallel so the indexer can spawn up to 4 threads for reading resource files and creating corresponding index files. Merging resource indexes into an index for Logos application use is storage intensive (lots of reads and writes).

Newer PCIe Flash and SATA III Solid State Disks (SSD) noticeably improve Logos responsiveness on OS X and Windows. PCIe Flash can transfer up to 800 MB per second, which is faster than 550 MB per second for SSD. Caveat: older SSD can be noticeably slower.

When running Windows in bootcamp on a Mac, then OS X is not running. Physical hard drive caveat: bootcamp setup chooses slower part of physical hard drive for Windows, which can be noticed in Logos. Wiki has => http://wiki.logos.com/Logos_4_Mac#Need_Logos_4_PC_feature.3f with virtualization and bootcamp tips.

Keep Smiling [:)]

Mike Binks

Can we get an official answer from Logos concerning the following questions:

I don't know but actually the underlying question is a bit of a false dichotomy. I have friends (admittedly light users*) of Logos who are happily running Logos on white plastic MacBooks and are delighted with the performance.

You will get a perfectly acceptable performance from any Mac that meets the minimum standards (and I think that is actually all of them) the incremental difference will only be discernible if you are a power user and then the difference will be marginal.

The rule for computer purchase is buy the biggest and fastest that you can afford - it applies to Mac as to anything else simply because demands on the system from software development grow over time.

I keep my Stable system on a MacBook Air i7 and it is blisteringly fast. My 'work a day' iMac is a duel core 2 machine that takes about 4 times as long to assimilate new resources but still runs happily multi-tasking while indexing continues.

I guess the official line, if it ever comes will be 'You pays your money and you takes your chance'. Which ever way you go you are unlikely to be disappointed.

* define light users as those who basically use Bible and Commentary rather than those who want to know how many times 'axe' is used within seven words of 'mother-in-law' - those I consider heavy users.

Fr. Charles R. Matheny

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/553226#Comment_553226

Great Post Lankford: Alas, it does not appear we will be getting an answer.

Donovan R. Palmer

Because Logos is so dependent on an internet connection, one of the things that is often not looked at is this side of the equation when it comes to requirements. Yes, you can run Logos in offline mode. However, you will be forced to go online at some point because you need an update and/or there are resources that aren't on the media dvd disk. Additionally, last I checked, the media dvd disk was not updated very often.

So what is the impact?

First, if your connection is slow, obviously you need to know that updates can take literally days. Dialup and even ISDN speeds are arguably not practical.

Second, if your connection is varied and unstable, my belief is the software is not very robust. If conditions when you first start using Logos are fine, but deteriorate, my experience Logos starts to get a bit hyper when it can't sync or populate the home page.

On this second point I have tried to submit logs to illustrate what I have experienced because I suspect that the developers rarely have poor internet connections in Bellingham to test their code on. The last time I submitted logs via email and explained what I thought I saw (and I qualify my statement with thought because I am no expert), I was asked to submit my logs (which says to me that my logs were looked at in the first place), update the software to the most recent version (which it was already) and rebuild the index. I resent my logs in and asked why they were not looked at in the first place and got no answer. When I pushed for further clarity, it was suggested that I run Logos in offline mode. (which I already do a lot of the time) I have seen others raise the question about the quality of connection impacting the performance of the software before and to my knowledge there has not been a definitive answer. Understandably, in the Logos pool of customers there probably aren't that many who live in the countryside or in foreign locations that don't have good access to internet, so it is probably not a priority to work on this.

Why do I make this point? The purpose of requirements is to alert the user to the conditions needed to run a piece of software. The concept I think is to alerting the user to what is required so that they don't buy a piece of software and then find that it does not meet expectations because of a less than optimal environment. Current minimum requirements say that an internet connection is required for activation and updates. I think this is too vague. Dialup is not going to cut it. Even 'broadband' that is varied in quality is not going to cut it. You might get by, in the same token as using a less than optimal processor, but as Logos is so dependent now on the internet my suggestion this needs to be beefed up a bit. Logos needs a fast and stable broadband internet connection and I think it should be part of the minimum requirements.

Lankford Oxendine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/553395#Comment_553395

Great Post Lankford: Alas, it does not appear we will be getting an answer.

I can't imagine why Logos would not answer. Hopefully because of the holidays they are a little backed up.

Fr. Charles R. Matheny

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/553793#Comment_553793

Perhaps they don't wish to be specific about how Logos software approaches Mac Hardware?

Tom Philpot (Faithlife)

1) How many cores and threads does the indexer use?

For indexing resources, up to 4 threads if you have 4 or more cores available. If you have fewer cores, fewer threads will be used.

2) How many cores and threads does the general program (non-indexing) use?

The app tries to do as much work in the background and in parallel as possible. Generally speaking, software, such as Logos, will request that work be done on a background thread and the operating system actually determines how the threads get scheduled on the available cores. So, there's not a specific, "Logos uses X cores" answer to this question.

3) Are the answers to 1) and 2) different for Windows? (i.e., in Windows does Logos use more cores/threads)

4) If Windows uses more cores/threads, will running Logos in virtualization on a Mac result in the extra resources being used?

5) If Windows uses more cores/threads, will running Logos in bootcamp on a Mac result in the extra resources being used?

No.

If your general question is how many cores should you have/need to run Logos for Mac, or what kind of hardware runs Logos for Mac best, I'll leave that to members of the community to discuss.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554272#Comment_554272

For indexing resources, up to 4 threads if you have 4 or more cores available. If you have fewer cores, fewer threads will be used.

Tom,

My i5-460M has 2 cores with hyperthreading and Logos allocates/uses 4 threads for indexing resources. I see all 4 CPU's running at maximum (95 - 98%) in Task Manager. Yet you indicate there is no difference for Windows. Is your use of "cores" different to accepted usage where the specification of my processor is:

# of cores 2

# of threads 4

meaning this dual-core processor can run 4 threads at a time?

Lankford Oxendine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554334#Comment_554334

I also notice on my 13" MBP (2 cores/4 thread) that indexing will start off using all 4 threads but then will scale down to one or two threads before indexing is over.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554334#Comment_554334

My i5-460M has 2 cores with hyperthreading and Logos allocates/uses 4 threads for indexing resources ... Is your use of "cores" different to accepted usage

I assume Tom meant logical cores (i.e., "hardware threads"), not physical cores, when he wrote "cores".

The Logos Indexer will start one thread per "CPU" (as shown in Windows Task Manager) up to 4 threads. This is the same on Windows and Mac.

David Medina

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554361#Comment_554361

It is really not a big deal. I run Logos on a 2006 Mac Pro without any issues.

I am a photographer and run programs that demands more than Logos from the computer and have no issues although do to image file size I am upgrading to the new MAC Pro next year. But still Logos runs fine.

So anything newer and faster will be better. Just buy the best you can afford and that way you guarantee it will last a long time.

David

Fr. Charles R. Matheny

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554365#Comment_554365

Dear Bradly: I think you have somehow been misinformed.

I checked with a couple of software designers and, read the articles they pointed me too:

1. Hardware does not recompile software.

2. One of the issues when Intel first came out with hyper threading was: There was no software written to make use of the hardware capability, though the average consumer had no idea. Software designers had to then rewire code to take advantage of the new hardware capabilities.

3. this is exactly the case with every advance in hard ware: Software then has to be written/re-written, to make use of the new hardware.

4. Mutli-core and the ability for multiple threads: The hardware advances made with multiple cores and the ability to run multiple lines/threads of date has been made, as we know, in the hardware area- when it first came out, there was very little software written to take advance of it- of course that changed quickly. The point is: No, the hardware will not split Logos into multiple information threads, Logos has to write their code to take advantage of the new hardware's capabilities.

Again : Intel does not know what Logos wants to do with their software, how Logos want to approach multiple cores and multiple threads of code, does not know how much, of what, it wants to offload to the Gpu.

Logos has to decide these things and write it's code to take advance of current hardware capabilities.

Thus, Unless lOGOS has figured out something no one else knows about , then the information you have been given regarding this question- is false, a mistake.

The other options are:

1. The code writers I know are badly mistaken.

2. The information on the web and at Intel is wrong.

Just sayin.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555145#Comment_555145

I think you have somehow been misinformed.

I re-read my statement, but it's not clear to me which part you think I may be misinformed about.

Logos has to decide these things and write it's code to take advance of current hardware capabilities.

That is exactly what we have done.

At runtime, the Indexer determines how many processors the computer has, then creates up to three new threads to use those processors. (If there are fewer than four processors, it will start fewer than three threads, but won't start more than three.) Including the main thread (which always exists), this allows for four resources to be indexed simultaneously on a multi-core system.

The relevant line of code is:

int nAdditionalThreads = Math.Min(3, Environment.ProcessorCount - 1);

(For the purposes of this calculation, a single physical core with hyperthreading counts as two "processors".)

Lee

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555177#Comment_555177

Merry Christmas, Bradley and Logos devs.

Here's hoping that the indexer issues will be finally and optimally solved in the months ahead!

Lankford Oxendine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555177#Comment_555177

Thanks for the help Bradley. If I understand you correctly, a dual core machine with hyper threading and a quad core machine with hyper threading will both use 4 threads when indexing. Therefore the quad core will be no faster with respect to indexing than the dual core (assuming processor speed is the same).

I'm wondering if Matheny's comments were regarding Tom's post. How many threads has Logos been programmed to use with regards to the general program (non-indexing use)? Thanks again.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555191#Comment_555191

If I understand you correctly, a dual core machine with hyper threading and a quad core machine with hyper threading will both use 4 threads when indexing.

Correct.

Therefore the quad core will be no faster with respect to indexing than the dual core (assuming processor speed is the same).

That's probably not true; hyper-threading does not provide a straight 2x speedup. A simplified explanation: In hyper-threading, a single CPU core acts (to the OS) as though it were two separate cores. The OS will schedule two threads to that single core and the single core will execute instructions for the second thread when it would otherwise be idle executing the first thread. (Modern CPUs spend a lot of time being idle, waiting for data from cache or memory.) In a true dual-core situation, there are two independent cores that can execute two threads truly in parallel.

For a fully parallel algorithm, a dual core would give close to a 2x speedup, while hyper-threading might be 1.3x (according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-threading#Performance_claims).

The actual speed-up is highly dependent on the algorithm, how much time it spends in concurrent or synchronised work, whether it's CPU-bound or I/O-bound, etc. If you had a dual-core, hyper-threaded processor, you could rebuild the index from scratch with hyper-threading enabled and disabled (in the BIOS) and compare the times. (In one case, it would use four threads; in the other, it would use just two.)

How many threads has Logos been programmed to use with regards to the general program (non-indexing use)?

There's not a set number. The program uses one thread for updating the UI, and a "thread pool" for background work. It will create new threads on demand based on how much background work is being done.

Lankford Oxendine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555249#Comment_555249

The light bulb just went off (I think)! So with a quad core processor, Logos indexer will assign one thread for each core (engaging all 4 cores and thereby not utilizing hyper threading) which is more efficient then assigning 4 threads to 2 cores (utilizing hyper threading). If this is all correct then I have a much clearer picture of what is going on. Thanks again!!

Fr. Charles R. Matheny

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555255#Comment_555255

Dear Tom: Merry Christmas!

My comment went to Logos in regular use.
I have been given to understand that Logos has to address the issue of multi-core/threads when writing code.

I also understand that Logos cannot address more that 4 gigs of ram, in actuality, as 32 bit, really only two, but with some commands, can get three, at the pout side four, but that basically, 32 bit can only write to ram at 32 bit addresses. Thus, the need for 8-16 gigs of ram really has nothing to do with Logos, it will not make it run any faster, smother, but will keep other programs from limiting Logos from getting the whole 2gigs of ram, perhaps three, it needs.

My , lets call it frustration, is that Logos is way behind the curve on both 64 bit/memory access and , writing to take full advantage of multiple processor/cores/threads etc.

Looking back on old posts, it was claimed other providers were not there yet: .net etc.

So my questions, as a Mac user are along those lines, will we ever be up to speed, will we ever have real access to our computing power/ram etc, are we always going to be hampered by a windows emulator /bridge between us an Osx/Mac etc.

Thanks

Not trying to be a stick in the mud-smile

Tom Philpot (Faithlife)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555290#Comment_555290

My , lets call it frustration, is that Logos is way behind the curve on both 64 bit/memory access

…

I don't have much first-hand knowledge on the current status of our 64 bit work. I think there is a team who is looking into it, but I don't know what the timetable is for completion. Mono hasn't been the hold-up here, as they have supported 64-bit since 2.10. We're shipping code based of a much more recent 3.x version. That said, we haven't tested any of our code on 64-bit Mono yet. We have a lot of code and libraries that need to be updated, compiled and tested to support 64-bit. Much of the work for 64 bit support is in common code that Mac and Windows share. So the 32 to 64 bit transition is not simply a Mac issue.

writing to take full advantage of multiple processor/cores/threads etc.

We do use multiple threads to do work when ever possible. The Operating System schedules the work for these threads on multiple cores as efficiently as it can. If you've ever run a complicated guide from the home page and seen EG, PG and other tools run simultaneously you've seen this in action. If you watch Activity Monitor and see the CPU usage of Logos use more than 100% CPU, you're seeing this in action. Generally speaking, if you see a progress indicator on the screen in the app, that indicator being updated on the main thread, and the actual work is being done on another thread.

will we ever be up to speed, will we ever have real access to our computing power/ram etc, are we always going to be hampered by a windows emulator /bridge between us an Osx/Mac etc

There's a false dichotomy between having Logos for Mac with Mono versus without Mono. Based on the amount of time and effort that has gone into writing the core C# code that is shared between Windows and Mac, there is no way we would be able to produce Logos on Mac with simply Objective-C/C++ and reach any consistent level of parity with Windows. Over the last four years, we have shifted to sharing as much code as possible between Windows and Mac because it increases development speed, allows bugs to be fixed on both platforms simultaneously, makes code easier for developers to understand and maintain.

Fr. Charles R. Matheny

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/556398#Comment_556398

Dear Tom:Thank you for the kind reply.

To be honest: For the life of me, I cannot understand how Accordance can build both Mac and Windows, with feature parity and both being native programs - and logos cannot do the same.

I guess its just beyond my small mind.

Many other companies do as well, with miles of code.

It's just beyond my ability to understand how Logos is so much harder to code for than anything else in the software world that is written for feature party acres multiple platforms.

Again, thank you for your kind response.

Lankford Oxendine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/557273#Comment_557273

Bradley or Tom,

Can you confirm if my logic/understanding is correct per my last post? Thanks!

Thinking

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/557273#Comment_557273

I cannot understand how Accordance can build both Mac and Windows, with feature parity and both being native programs - and logos cannot do the same.

From my biased Mac viewpoint, it is because Accordance was written with the Mac philosophy on a Mac first, then ported to Windows. If you start out with a Windows program, then port it to keep it as a Windows program you'll have problems, because Apple doesn't really help developers create programs looking like they are Windows programs. So you use .Net with MONO.

That said, now that I shut down Logos before putting my computer to sleep, and now that I can reboot the Mac quickly with the new retinal MacBook Pro, and with reasonably reliable and rapid internet, I am using Logos much more consistently and learning its "ways." It is satisfactory at last. Hope the new beta really does solve the sleep apnea the program has.

Fr. Charles R. Matheny

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/557286#Comment_557286

O do not believe they "ported " it to windows. The actually wrote it for windows with the same features, UI layouts etc.

It's blazingly fast and stable on both.

It is my hope that someday- before I die- Logos will do the same for us.

Ahh, Hope, not biblical type, the dream type.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/557292#Comment_557292

It is my hope that someday- before I die- Logos will do the same for us.

+1 [Y] hoping for stable Logos releases on OS X and Windows that enable awesome Bible Study, ideally with sub-second responses.

Initially, Logos outsourced development of Libronix 3 port to be a native Mac OS X application that used Safari for display rendering (similar architecture as Libronix 3 that uses Internet Explorer to display stuff). Wiki now has Logos for Mac 1 History => http://wiki.logos.com/Mac_Release_Notes_and_History#Logos_for_Mac_1_History

Observation: Logos 5 on OS X was shipped in less time after Logos 4 announcement (~ 3 years) than Logos for Mac shipped after initial announcement (~4 years).

Thankful for Logos sharing code base across platforms, which includes cloud sync of many items. Thankful for substantial Logos 5 feature parity between OS X and Windows. Thankful for visual filter highlighting that combines hundreds of search results for simultaneous display. Caveat: combining visual filter search results is intense; newer 3rd generation Intel i5 and i7 with Solid State Disk (SSD) combines search results in several seconds. Thankful for responsive resource scrolling with visual filters active.

The light bulb just went off (I think)! So with a quad core processor, Logos indexer will assign one thread for each core (engaging all 4 cores and thereby not utilizing hyper threading) which is more efficient then assigning 4 threads to 2 cores (utilizing hyper threading). If this is all correct then I have a much clearer picture of what is going on. Thanks again!!

A quad core processor with hyper threading enabled appears as eight CPU's. Logos indexer creates four threads for the operating system to schedule execution. Using Activity Monitor to show CPU History => https://support.apple.com/kb/HT4180 noticed OS X 10.8.5 running on a quad core i7 tends to schedule threads on different physical cores (primary core is typically busy while hyperthreading core is nearly idle).

Keep Smiling [:)]

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555255#Comment_555255

The light bulb just went off (I think)! So with a quad core processor, Logos indexer will assign one thread for each core (engaging all 4 cores and thereby not utilizing hyper threading) which is more efficient then assigning 4 threads to 2 cores (utilizing hyper threading).

Logos creates the number of threads as Bradley described, but the OS assigns the threads to (physical) cores as efficiently as it can. So that what you state is typically true but hyper threading may be employed in a quad core i.e. running 4 indexing threads on 3 cores or less for some or all of the indexing.

Thinking

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/557292#Comment_557292

O do not believe they "ported " it to windows.

You are correct. It was a poor choice of words.

Tom Philpot

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555255#Comment_555255

So with a quad core processor, Logos indexer will assign one thread for each core (engaging all 4 cores and thereby not utilizing hyper threading) which is more efficient then assigning 4 threads to 2 cores (utilizing hyper threading).

Technically, the operating system decides where the threads run, Logos just tells creates the threads and gives them work. But the OS should run each thread run on a separate core if one is available. It's also safe to say a quad-core processor is generally faster than a dual-core using hyper-threading, other things being equal.

Quick Links

Recent Posts
Activity
Unanswered