Is your ConTeXt too slow?

Is your ConTeXt too slow?

[Jens-Uwe Morawski]

Hi all (or mainly the users of Unix-like systems)

after i've bought a new notebook and installed the recent
Redhat Linux system i found that an updated ConTeXt runs
very slow. First i thought that Hans had too much time
and implemented a few thousand new features that need
their time, but ...

... it is a queerer story. Here are the run times of
an example document (many inline MP graphics, 18 pages,
many terminal messages !!) on different terminal programs
for X-Windows:

gnome-terminal:         2 min 18 sec
konsole (KDE-terminal): 1 min 30 sec
xterm:                  1 min  5 sec
directly on the console
        (no X-Windows):       58 sec

Normally i use the first. Hmm... ;-(

Don't ask me for reasons, but if your ConTeXt is too
slow, ask yourself if you run it on the right terminal -)

Jens

Re: Is your ConTeXt too slow?

[Hans Hagen]

At 09:36 PM 11/7/2002 +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:

>Hi all (or mainly the users of Unix-like systems)
>
>after i've bought a new notebook and installed the recent
>Redhat Linux system i found that an updated ConTeXt runs
>very slow. First i thought that Hans had too much time
>and implemented a few thousand new features that need
>their time, but ...
>
>... it is a queerer story. Here are the run times of
>an example document (many inline MP graphics, 18 pages,
>many terminal messages !!) on different terminal programs
>for X-Windows:
>
>gnome-terminal:         2 min 18 sec
>konsole (KDE-terminal): 1 min 30 sec
>xterm:                  1 min  5 sec
>directly on the console
>         (no X-Windows):       58 sec
>
>Normally i use the first. Hmm... ;-(
>
>Don't ask me for reasons, but if your ConTeXt is too
>slow, ask yourself if you run it on the right terminal -)

Can you check if kpsewhich runs ok? For instance

   kpsewhich colo-ini.tex

   kpsewhich cmr10.tfm

maybe no ls-R file is found and consulted, resulting in a full scan of the 
texmf file structure.

[you can also set the kpse debug switch]

[here, i run a minimal context distribution which is esp on smaller jobs 
much faster, since in uses a 50 MEG texmf tree (including fonts) instead of 
the main 500 MEG one)

Hans

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE | pragma@wxs.nl
                       Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
  tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        information: http://www.pragma-ade.com/roadmap.pdf
                     documentation: http://www.pragma-ade.com/showcase.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Is your ConTeXt too slow?

[Jens-Uwe Morawski]

On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:30:56 +0100
Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:

> At 09:36 PM 11/7/2002 +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:
> 
> >Hi all (or mainly the users of Unix-like systems)
> >
> >after i've bought a new notebook and installed the recent
> >Redhat Linux system i found that an updated ConTeXt runs
> >very slow. First i thought that Hans had too much time
> >and implemented a few thousand new features that need
> >their time, but ...
> >
> >... it is a queerer story. Here are the run times of
> >an example document (many inline MP graphics, 18 pages,
> >many terminal messages !!) on different terminal programs
> >for X-Windows:
> >
> >gnome-terminal:         2 min 18 sec
> >konsole (KDE-terminal): 1 min 30 sec
> >xterm:                  1 min  5 sec
> >directly on the console
> >         (no X-Windows):       58 sec
> >
> >Normally i use the first. Hmm... ;-(
> >
> >Don't ask me for reasons, but if your ConTeXt is too
> >slow, ask yourself if you run it on the right terminal -)
> 
> Can you check if kpsewhich runs ok? For instance
> 
>    kpsewhich colo-ini.tex
> 
>    kpsewhich cmr10.tfm
> 
> maybe no ls-R file is found and consulted, resulting in a full scan of the 
> texmf file structure.

No, no. TeX finds its files very fast. I could improve that with a smaller
texmf-tree, but 1+ min for the job is IMO okay; it runs 3xConTeXt,
2xTeXUtil and 2xMetaPost. The problem is the terminal program. It seems
that the drawing of those many messages on the terminal needs much time.
If i use a slow terminal, i.e. gnome-terminal, then the runtime increases.

Can i switch off the messages generated by ConTeXt, this would help to
compare.

Jens 

Re: Is your ConTeXt too slow?

[Jan Hlavacek]

On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 11:03:48AM +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:30:56 +0100
> Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:
> 
> > At 09:36 PM 11/7/2002 +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:
> > 
> > >Hi all (or mainly the users of Unix-like systems)
> > >
> > >after i've bought a new notebook and installed the recent
> > >Redhat Linux system i found that an updated ConTeXt runs
> > >very slow. First i thought that Hans had too much time
> > >and implemented a few thousand new features that need
> > >their time, but ...
> > >
> > >... it is a queerer story. Here are the run times of
> > >an example document (many inline MP graphics, 18 pages,
> > >many terminal messages !!) on different terminal programs
> > >for X-Windows:
> > >
> > >gnome-terminal:         2 min 18 sec
> > >konsole (KDE-terminal): 1 min 30 sec
> > >xterm:                  1 min  5 sec
> > >directly on the console
> > >         (no X-Windows):       58 sec
> > >
> > >Normally i use the first. Hmm... ;-(
> > >
> > >Don't ask me for reasons, but if your ConTeXt is too
> > >slow, ask yourself if you run it on the right terminal -)
> > 
> > Can you check if kpsewhich runs ok? For instance
> > 
> >    kpsewhich colo-ini.tex
> > 
> >    kpsewhich cmr10.tfm
> > 
> > maybe no ls-R file is found and consulted, resulting in a full scan of the 
> > texmf file structure.
> 
> No, no. TeX finds its files very fast. I could improve that with a smaller
> texmf-tree, but 1+ min for the job is IMO okay; it runs 3xConTeXt,
> 2xTeXUtil and 2xMetaPost. The problem is the terminal program. It seems
> that the drawing of those many messages on the terminal needs much time.
> If i use a slow terminal, i.e. gnome-terminal, then the runtime increases.
> 
> Can i switch off the messages generated by ConTeXt, this would help to
> compare.


Did you try to run context with output redirected to a file?  How long
does that take? 

try texexec yourfile.tex > logfile

then look at the file called logfile to see the messages.

-- 
Jan Hlavacek                                            (219) 434-7566
Department of Mathematics                             Jhlavacek@sf.edu
University of Saint Francis               http://www.sf.edu/jhlavacek/

Re: Is your ConTeXt too slow?

[Jens-Uwe Morawski]

On Fri, 8 Nov 2002 08:28:14 -0500
Jan Hlavacek <jhlavacek@sf.edu> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 11:03:48AM +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:
> > On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:30:56 +0100
> > Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:
> > 
> > > At 09:36 PM 11/7/2002 +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:

> > > >gnome-terminal:         2 min 18 sec
> > > >konsole (KDE-terminal): 1 min 30 sec
> > > >xterm:                  1 min  5 sec
> > > >directly on the console
> > > >         (no X-Windows):       58 sec
> > > >
> > > >Don't ask me for reasons, but if your ConTeXt is too
> > > >slow, ask yourself if you run it on the right terminal -)
> > > 
> > > maybe no ls-R file is found and consulted, resulting in a full scan of the 
> > > texmf file structure.
> > 
> > No, no. TeX finds its files very fast. I could improve that with a smaller
> > texmf-tree, but 1+ min for the job is IMO okay; it runs 3xConTeXt,
> > 2xTeXUtil and 2xMetaPost. The problem is the terminal program. It seems
> > that the drawing of those many messages on the terminal needs much time.
> > If i use a slow terminal, i.e. gnome-terminal, then the runtime increases.

> Did you try to run context with output redirected to a file?  How long
> does that take? 
> 
> try texexec yourfile.tex > logfile

ahh, interesting idea. Now it is independent from the used terminal and a run
needs about 50 seconds.

Jens

Re: Is your ConTeXt too slow?

[Hans Hagen]

At 04:51 PM 11/8/2002 +0100, you wrote:

> > Did you try to run context with output redirected to a file?  How long
> > does that take?
> >
> > try texexec yourfile.tex > logfile
>
>ahh, interesting idea. Now it is independent from the used terminal and a run
>needs about 50 seconds.

another option is to choose another terminal font (bitmap versus outline)

also, try

texexec --silent .....

Hans
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE | pragma@wxs.nl
                       Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
  tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        information: http://www.pragma-ade.com/roadmap.pdf
                     documentation: http://www.pragma-ade.com/showcase.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Is your ConTeXt too slow?

[Henning Hraban Ramm]

> another option is to choose another terminal font (bitmap versus outline)

I normally hide my terminal window (Win Cmd, too) at bigger jobs.

Grüßlis vom Hraban!
-- 
http://www.fiee.net
http://www.ramm.ch
---