1 |
Mick wrote: |
2 |
> On Monday 26 Nov 2012 12:43:38 Dale wrote: |
3 |
>> Mick wrote: |
4 |
>>> On Monday 26 Nov 2012 09:56:27 Florian Philipp wrote: |
5 |
>>>> Hi list! |
6 |
>>>> |
7 |
>>>> I have a suspicion that viewing certain PDFs in okular causes X server |
8 |
>>>> to leak memory. Currently it is using 1.8 GB after 3 days uptime. Has |
9 |
>>>> anyone else observed that? Is there a way to inspect X server's memory |
10 |
>>>> usage? |
11 |
>>> I have noticed that okular recently started breaking into a sweat when it |
12 |
>>> renders pdf files. Even a four page document with a bit of colour and |
13 |
>>> |
14 |
>>> graphics seems to push the cpu: |
15 |
>>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND |
16 |
>>> |
17 |
>>> 16387 michael 23 3 466m 52m 30m S 102 1.3 0:36.88 |
18 |
>>> /usr/bin/okular <<< SNIP >>> |
19 |
>>> |
20 |
>>> Once rendered, the CPU goes down to normal levels. The problem does not |
21 |
>>> seem to occur when the pdf is just text, i.e. no photographs, or complex |
22 |
>>> graphics in it. |
23 |
>>> |
24 |
>>> Other than the various top apps, perhaps you can try lsof? |
25 |
>> I have a local grocery store that I have to go to the website to get |
26 |
>> their sale ads. Anyway, it is generally 2 pages and even on this 4 core |
27 |
>> rig with more than plenty of ram, it takes a bit to open them. Funny |
28 |
>> thing is, I have some that is about sewing, lots of pictures in those |
29 |
>> since I need pics to get the idea, anyway, they load up in a flash. As |
30 |
>> soon as Okular loads, the pages are there. |
31 |
>> |
32 |
>> Since this is more like what Florian describes, I guess we see the same |
33 |
>> things. I'm not sure about ram itself but some files do open |
34 |
>> differently. By the way, the grocery ad is a much smaller file than the |
35 |
>> sewing files. Both in file size and number of pages. One would expect |
36 |
>> it to be the opposite. |
37 |
>> |
38 |
>> Looks like I have a problem that I didn't know I had. With 16Gbs of |
39 |
>> ram, I hadn't noticed anything with the ram, other than Seamonkey being |
40 |
>> its usual hoggy self. :/ I guess this is to sort of confirm that |
41 |
>> someone else sees a similar thing to Florian. |
42 |
> This is not a RAM issue, but seemingly a CPU issue. Furthermore, it does not |
43 |
> seem to be related exclusively to okular. I just tried qpdfview and it also |
44 |
> took ages to open/render - HOWEVER - when I tried mupdf it was rendered in |
45 |
> milliseconds and the CPU usage stayed very very low. This may be something to |
46 |
> do with the wonderful KDE and friends. |
47 |
> |
48 |
> I recently upgraded to KDE-4.9.3 and this is not the only thing I noticed. In |
49 |
> Kmail-1.13.7 all sent messages are saved in the local/sent-mail directory, |
50 |
> irrespective of the path I enter in Kmail's settings for each email account. |
51 |
> Initially I though that sent messages were being lost - not sent - but then I |
52 |
> noticed that the default sent folder started getting larger. |
53 |
> |
54 |
> I better start another thread for this problem. |
55 |
|
56 |
That was mostly my point but I seemed to have glossed over the CPU part |
57 |
after rereading my post. My point was, ram is not a issue because I |
58 |
have lots of it. The subject mentions memory so I mostly went to it |
59 |
instead of the CPU. Even with that much ram, it takes a long time to |
60 |
load, at least for some files. It seems to be a CPU thing, not a memory |
61 |
thing. Maybe Florian knows something we don't know at this point. |
62 |
|
63 |
I don't know the exact percentages but I usually max out at least one |
64 |
core when I open the grocery ad. The sewing files, although larger, |
65 |
open faster. I just wonder what is used to make one as opposed to the |
66 |
other? Maybe that is the difference. |
67 |
|
68 |
Dale |
69 |
|
70 |
:-) :-) |
71 |
|
72 |
-- |
73 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! |