807 And Performance for very large projects

The "tuning for better performance" feature is indeed a huge optimization
for large projects, both for performance and memory consumption.

Eugene


"Fred Smith" <allspamgone@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:17660287.1048643341361.JavaMail.jrun@is.intellij.net...

Does 807 address the often asked question on these forums about IntelliJ's

slow performance for very large projects? My biggest complaints are about
sluggish response to keyboard input, and nagging hanging problems.
>

When 807 loads a project it goes through a very lengthy process of "tuning

for better performance". Is this a new performance enhancment?
>
>

I consider this 'feature' to be much more important than AspectJ, etc, and

I am sure that most people would agree.
>

Any breaking news on this?

>

Thanks

What was done to optomize the performance?

Do you expect we describe argorithm and other implementation details here?

--

Best regards,
Maxim Shafirov
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


"Fred Smith" <allspamgone@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8052753.1048659580747.JavaMail.jrun@is.intellij.net...

What was done to optomize the performance?

Of course. How else do you expect us to make our IDE fast and cool too? jk.

First of all I expect a curteous and professional answer, not a rude remark.

Second, I am not asking for your secret algorithm, just a general description of how and why performance is improved.

Last thought I had in mind is to appear rude. Sorry if I was for you.
In my opinion any performance improvements are implementation details, that
aren't usually subjects for discussion in EAP.
Most I can say Aurora caches more information about your project, library
and JDK classes than Ariadna did and builds more indicies for faster
information retreival. That's why it should be faster.
Is this information explanatory enough?

--

Best regards,
Maxim Shafirov
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


"Fred Smith" <allspamgone@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:24696771.1048690059353.JavaMail.jrun@is.intellij.net...

First of all I expect a curteous and professional answer, not a rude

remark.
>

Second, I am not asking for your secret algorithm, just a general

description of how and why performance is improved.
>

Fred Smith wrote:

First of all I expect a curteous and professional answer, not a rude remark.

Second, I am not asking for your secret algorithm, just a general description of how and why performance is improved.

My 2c:
first, by reading the thread, Max did not appear rude to me (but I'm not
a native English speaker, too).

second, in this forums I do not expect
a curteous and professional answer, **actually I want them to be fun and lively ** as any developer community forum. I would prefer a curteous and professional answer, ]]>

to be left in formal support emails where you pay for it ...

Edo

At what cost does it build the indices, etc. Does it take more RAM, more hard drive space, etc?

So far 807 seems to have much better performance.

Thanks!

At what cost does it build the indices, etc. Does it take more RAM, more

hard drive space, etc?

Look in the system/caches directory. For me, 12 MB in ariadna, 60MB in
aurora (with fewer projects converted to aurora).

Seems all jars are thoroughly inspected and cached now.

I've noticed at once that searching in libs has become lightning fast :)

>

I've noticed at once that searching in libs has become lightning fast :)

Few other hints to find hard-to-find performance upgrade: Try to find
derived classes for something heavily derived, JComponent for example.
Compare CtrlAltSpace speed with Ariadna.

Project loading is much faster too for me.

--
Jordan Zimmerman
Altura International
Catalog City

Did anyone noticed slower response and frequen pauses while editing in
Aurora vs. Ariadna? Especially XML files or it's just me?
I have the same JVM setup for both (memory, parallel/concurrent GC) and
Ariadna is smooth - I never feel any delays but with Aurora I do


"Fred Smith" <allspamgone@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:17660287.1048643341361.JavaMail.jrun@is.intellij.net...

Does 807 address the often asked question on these forums about IntelliJ's

slow performance for very large projects? My biggest complaints are about
sluggish response to keyboard input, and nagging hanging problems.
>

When 807 loads a project it goes through a very lengthy process of "tuning

for better performance". Is this a new performance enhancment?
>
>

I consider this 'feature' to be much more important than AspectJ, etc, and

I am sure that most people would agree.
>

Any breaking news on this?

>

Thanks

Alex Roytman wrote:

Did anyone noticed slower response and frequen pauses while editing in
Aurora vs. Ariadna? Especially XML files or it's just me?
I have the same JVM setup for both (memory, parallel/concurrent GC) and
Ariadna is smooth - I never feel any delays but with Aurora I do

Yes, but only when I copy text to the clipboard. See thread starting
with msg id <pan.2003.03.17.23.23.25.684809@satinism.org> (804
stalling...). Although I don't remember any gc breaks. Memory
consumption seems to be lower and more stable than in Ariadna.

Best regards,

Dirk Dittert

I still experience pauses while I edit my JAVA sources.
I usually happens when I copy/paste, but whenever it happens, I notice the memory counter jumping after the IDE hangs.
Also in 807, I notice that the automatic error parsing of the JAVA file (that is triggerred by default every 300 ms if I remember well) seems to take a lot more time to display the Yellow/Red/Blue bars on the right....even with small files. Anyone with the same experience ?
(The IDE doesn't hang, it's just that I have to wait a lot before the bars appear)

Pentium III 1200 MHz
384 Mo SDRAM

Dan/

Hi Dan,

Please buy another memory bar. From my experience you cannot run a
Java IDE and a Java program with fewer memory than 512MB without
noticable slow-down.

Tom

All Right, I'll Consider This !
(If my boss allocates the money for it)
;=)

I'm working on relatively small projects though,
30-40 K-LOC
but some of the classes are big (with lots of inner classes)

So I guess more memory would definitely help with the syntax/error parser and the copy/paste issues.

By the way, IDEA allocates several buffers when copying data (See Ctrl - Shift - V).
Is there any way to only use one buffer, instead of the default BUFFER_MAX (how many ??)
I usually only use the last buffer, so for me, size-one buffer history would be enough.
This way, I could free some memory after copying a large amount of code by copying a space character for example, as that would overwrite the current buffer (With the current BUFFER_MAX, that simply adds another buffer to the buffer history.
Or maybe there is a straight-forward way to empty all buffer ?

Thanks.
Dan/

I found it !!
It's in the IDE settings
(Maximum number of contents to keep in clipboard)
default == 5

Sorry for the useless question !
Dan/

I am thinking about a "Purge All" action like the one in Photoshop.

Since IDEA deals with fairly large amounts of data, I think it makes sense to be able to
clear the caches, clipboards, whatever...

There could be icon in the lower right corner of the status bar just next to the recycle bin.

Do you think this makes sense?

-- dimiter