Structure view is now very slow on build 657

I created a project from scratch. Brought up a java class in the editor and
view its structure now takes anywhere between 6 to 9 seconds (versus about 2
seconds on build 655). The class has over 200 methods. Everything else seems
to be faster though. Any ideas?
-Duc


4 comments
Comment actions Permalink

I think they've sacrificed structure scanning speed for editor
performance. It's particularly obvious in extreme cases like you describe.

Duc Nguyen wrote:

I created a project from scratch. Brought up a java class in the editor and
view its structure now takes anywhere between 6 to 9 seconds (versus about 2
seconds on build 655). The class has over 200 methods. Everything else seems
to be faster though. Any ideas?
-Duc


--
Gordon Tyler
Software Developer, R&D
Sitraka -- Performance is Mission Critical

0
Comment actions Permalink

Possibly related, i noticed that if I float the Structure window and drag it
around, the memory used goes crazy. For me, it quickly grows from about 21
to 127 in about 5 seconds, then gets garbage collected down to 21 again,
then quickly grows back up to 127, etc. Dragging the Structure window
around is a lot "choppier" too, compared with dragging the floating Project
window (which is quite smooth). Anyone else see this?

[Win2k sp3, IDEA 657, bundled JRE, modified build.bat so min memory is 128
and max is 256]

chris

"Duc Nguyen" <duc.nguyen@plateau.com> wrote in message
news:ao1roe$aen$1@is.intellij.net...

I created a project from scratch. Brought up a java class in the editor

and

view its structure now takes anywhere between 6 to 9 seconds (versus about

2

seconds on build 655). The class has over 200 methods. Everything else

seems

to be faster though. Any ideas?
-Duc

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

More info: The structure view was displaying the contents of a very simple
test class containing only 3 methods. Toggling Autoscroll to/from source,
sort alphabetically, etc doesn't help.

I don't see the same behavior in 655.

"Chris Bartley" <spam@feynman.org> wrote in message
news:ao1svk$bvh$1@is.intellij.net...

Possibly related, i noticed that if I float the Structure window and drag

it

around, the memory used goes crazy. For me, it quickly grows from about

21

to 127 in about 5 seconds, then gets garbage collected down to 21 again,
then quickly grows back up to 127, etc. Dragging the Structure window
around is a lot "choppier" too, compared with dragging the floating

Project

window (which is quite smooth). Anyone else see this?

>

[Win2k sp3, IDEA 657, bundled JRE, modified build.bat so min memory is 128
and max is 256]

>

chris



0
Comment actions Permalink

I'm seeing generally higher memory use over 655. I've also got a weird
'memory creep' issue whereby every 10 seconds or so my memory use increases
by 1MB from the average use of 33MB to over 102MB and then it drops back
down and begins creeping again. I'm also finding that my normal memory use
is about 10MB higher in 657 than in 655 for exactly the same project.
Performance is much improved in the editor, though.



"Chris Bartley" <spam@feynman.org> wrote in message
news:ao1svk$bvh$1@is.intellij.net...

Possibly related, i noticed that if I float the Structure window and drag

it

around, the memory used goes crazy. For me, it quickly grows from about

21

to 127 in about 5 seconds, then gets garbage collected down to 21 again,
then quickly grows back up to 127, etc. Dragging the Structure window
around is a lot "choppier" too, compared with dragging the floating

Project

window (which is quite smooth). Anyone else see this?

>

[Win2k sp3, IDEA 657, bundled JRE, modified build.bat so min memory is 128
and max is 256]

>

chris

>

"Duc Nguyen" <duc.nguyen@plateau.com> wrote in message
news:ao1roe$aen$1@is.intellij.net...

I created a project from scratch. Brought up a java class in the editor

and

view its structure now takes anywhere between 6 to 9 seconds (versus

about

2

seconds on build 655). The class has over 200 methods. Everything else

seems

to be faster though. Any ideas?
-Duc

>
>

>
>


0

Please sign in to leave a comment.