Re: [SLE] OpenOffice slow in 8.2
On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 22:19, Fred A. Miller wrote:
Uninstall it, download the latest release, and install it. 'Should fix your problems. The release that ships with 8.2 is buggy.
Fred
Thanks Fred, that's exactly what I did, installed OOo 1.1Beta. Works smooth as silk if I stop Setiathome, but remains unusuable if seti or anything cpu intensive is running. This in itself isn't so bad, except that I didn't have this problem under 8.1 and 8.0, where I had seti runing with nice=1 all the time and OOo was working smoothly. Just trying to understand this Thanks Hans
The 03.05.29 at 08:41, H du Plooy wrote:
Thanks Fred, that's exactly what I did, installed OOo 1.1Beta. Works smooth as silk if I stop Setiathome, but remains unusuable if seti or anything cpu intensive is running. This in itself isn't so bad, except that I didn't have this problem under 8.1 and 8.0, where I had seti runing with nice=1 all the time and OOo was working smoothly.
OO 1.0.3 gets very slow and unresponsive - under my SuSE 8.1 - when I connect to Internet with a modem and start downloading mail, which is CPU intensive because of viruscan and spamassassin filters. However, it is only OO that feels slow, the rest of the system stays crispy. And this is a SuSE 8.1... My guess is that OO needs very fast response from the CPU; maybe it uses some kind of polling loop. -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
There is something odd going on with OpenOffice and SuSE. I found that if I stop my distributed.net client that OpenOffice works much better, at least it is usable then. Then I did a test on my laptop that runs Libranet (Debian). There if I don't have to stop the distributed.net client, OpenOffice runs at full speed even if the CPU is 100% busy. I don't normally run high CPU usage stuff on the laptop because that is a good way to fry a laptop, they are not engineered for 100% CPU usage. Where do you report bugs in SuSE? This appears to be a SuSE problem and not an OpenOffice problem. I could not find anything in OpenOffice's bug tracking system on this problem. pben
On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 19:43, Paul Benjamin wrote:
There is something odd going on with OpenOffice and SuSE. I found that if I stop my distributed.net client that OpenOffice works much better, at least it is usable then.
Then I did a test on my laptop that runs Libranet (Debian). There if I don't have to stop the distributed.net client, OpenOffice runs at full speed even if the CPU is 100% busy. I don't normally run high CPU usage stuff on the laptop because that is a good way to fry a laptop, they are not engineered for 100% CPU usage.
Where do you report bugs in SuSE? This appears to be a SuSE problem and not an OpenOffice problem. I could not find anything in OpenOffice's bug tracking system on this problem.
There have been quite a few posts on the slowness of OO in SuSE 8.2. It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common because I'm running OO w/SuSE 8.2 and it is perfectly responsive. It does take a tiny bit of time to open (a few seconds), but I can't see that any of the OO components behave differently than any other app - speedy. So it must be something that is different on the systems experiencing the slowness. I agree that it probably isn't an OO issue because the OO code you're running and I'm running is the same (I'm using the OO that came with 8.2 and assume you are, too). I clean-installed 8.2, using the standard AMD kernel that came with the distro, ACPI off, and no tweaks. Very standard all the way around. I don't run any distributed computing clients like Seti, so maybe that's it? What about the graphics cards involved - could the difficulty be coming from there perhaps? Mine is a Geforce 2 Ultra 64MB. Cheers and good luck, Malke -- Elephant Boy Computers www.elephantboycomputers.com Don't Panic!
It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common
So far it seems distributed.net and the SETI client have been mentioned. Both are obviously CPU intensive. Took a while for it to hit me when I wondered why my laptop battery didn't last more than a few minutes. Between the distributed.net client and my wireless nic I was lucky to get 15-20 minutes on a Thinkpad T20. -- John LeMay KC2KTH Senior Enterprise Consultant NJMC | http://www.njmc.com | Phone 732-557-4848 Specializing in Microsoft and Unix based solutions
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 04:19, John LeMay wrote:
It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common
So far it seems distributed.net and the SETI client have been mentioned. Both are obviously CPU intensive.
Took a while for it to hit me when I wondered why my laptop battery didn't last more than a few minutes. Between the distributed.net client and my wireless nic I was lucky to get 15-20 minutes on a Thinkpad T20.
I was talking to a Linux Guru friend last night, he was suggesting that
the Seti client is optimised to run in L2 cache, so when other apps need
a slice of time, the Seti code will need to be flushed from the cache
and re-loaded later this could cause the poor performance.
It would be interesting to pin the poor performance of OO down, maybe
it's a problem with AMD cpus ? has anybody experienced this problem with
Intel cpus?
I have tried OO 1.1 on my Dell CPI Laptop, I haven't tried it running
with Seti although I get the same slowness if I run KWiFiManager.
I have downloaded the OO 1.2 Beta, and this seems to work a bit better
with Seti although OO is still slow to respond.
--
David Bottrill
On Saturday 31 May 2003 9:58 am, David Bottrill wrote:
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 04:19, John LeMay wrote:
It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common
So far it seems distributed.net and the SETI client have been mentioned. Both are obviously CPU intensive.
Took a while for it to hit me when I wondered why my laptop battery didn't last more than a few minutes. Between the distributed.net client and my wireless nic I was lucky to get 15-20 minutes on a Thinkpad T20.
I was talking to a Linux Guru friend last night, he was suggesting that the Seti client is optimised to run in L2 cache, so when other apps need a slice of time, the Seti code will need to be flushed from the cache and re-loaded later this could cause the poor performance.
Same problem on a 2.4ghz Intel P4 running StarOffice 6.0
It would be interesting to pin the poor performance of OO down, maybe it's a problem with AMD cpus ? has anybody experienced this problem with Intel cpus?
I have tried OO 1.1 on my Dell CPI Laptop, I haven't tried it running with Seti although I get the same slowness if I run KWiFiManager.
I have downloaded the OO 1.2 Beta, and this seems to work a bit better with Seti although OO is still slow to respond.
-- David Bottrill
-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 05/31/03 11:08 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "The best way to win an argument is to begin by being right." --Jill Ruckelshaus
My system is a Tyan Thunder K7 dual 1.2GHz Athlon with nViada GeForce Ti 4200 with the nVidia drivers that I got from their web site when I installed 8.2 over 8.1 The distributed client has an option that will suspend their client when a user defined process is started. I put in soffice.bin so that stops the client and lets OpenOffice run at full speed. I am currently using OpenOffice 1.1 Beta2 to see if the SuSE OO rpm was at fault. Beta2 had the same problem, it wasn't until I read this thread on the mailing list that I thought of stopping the distributed project. I can't think of anything that SuSE is doing that all that different than the Debian kernel that I compiled on my laptop. I have a work around thanks to this mailing list but I would like to know what is really happening. pben On Friday 30 May 2003 10:04 pm, Marian Routh wrote:
There have been quite a few posts on the slowness of OO in SuSE 8.2. It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common because I'm running OO w/SuSE 8.2 and it is perfectly responsive. It does take a tiny bit of time to open (a few seconds), but I can't see that any of the OO components behave differently than any other app - speedy. So it must be something that is different on the systems experiencing the slowness. I agree that it probably isn't an OO issue because the OO code you're running and I'm running is the same (I'm using the OO that came with 8.2 and assume you are, too). I clean-installed 8.2, using the standard AMD kernel that came with the distro, ACPI off, and no tweaks. Very standard all the way around. I don't run any distributed computing clients like Seti, so maybe that's it? What about the graphics cards involved - could the difficulty be coming from there perhaps? Mine is a Geforce 2 Ultra 64MB.
Cheers and good luck,
Malke -- Elephant Boy Computers www.elephantboycomputers.com Don't Panic!
On Friday 30 May 2003 23:39 pm, Paul Benjamin wrote:
My system is a Tyan Thunder K7 dual 1.2GHz Athlon with nViada GeForce Ti 4200 with the nVidia drivers that I got from their web site when I installed 8.2 over 8.1
The distributed client has an option that will suspend their client when a user defined process is started. I put in soffice.bin so that stops the client and lets OpenOffice run at full speed. I am currently using OpenOffice 1.1 Beta2 to see if the SuSE OO rpm was at fault. Beta2 had the same problem, it wasn't until I read this thread on the mailing list that I thought of stopping the distributed project.
I can't think of anything that SuSE is doing that all that different than the Debian kernel that I compiled on my laptop. I have a work around thanks to this mailing list but I would like to know what is really happening.
pben
I noticed the same problem (using StarOffice 6.0) when I switched to 8.2 from 8.0. NOTE: I was running the 2.4.20 kernel on 8.0 and had no problems, but that same kernel (in the 8.2 distribution) causes the problem. So SuSE must have put some added patches onto their kernel. I'm waiting for the 2.4.21 kernel to be released so maybe I can eliminate the problem.
On Friday 30 May 2003 10:04 pm, Marian Routh wrote:
There have been quite a few posts on the slowness of OO in SuSE 8.2. It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common because I'm running OO w/SuSE 8.2 and it is perfectly responsive. It does take a tiny bit of time to open (a few seconds), but I can't see that any of the OO components behave differently than any other app - speedy. So it must be something that is different on the systems experiencing the slowness. I agree that it probably isn't an OO issue because the OO code you're running and I'm running is the same (I'm using the OO that came with 8.2 and assume you are, too). I clean-installed 8.2, using the standard AMD kernel that came with the distro, ACPI off, and no tweaks. Very standard all the way around. I don't run any distributed computing clients like Seti, so maybe that's it? What about the graphics cards involved - could the difficulty be coming from there perhaps? Mine is a Geforce 2 Ultra 64MB.
Cheers and good luck,
Malke -- Elephant Boy Computers www.elephantboycomputers.com Don't Panic!
-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 05/31/03 10:40 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "Virtual Reality is for those who can't handle the other kind."
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 05:04, Marian Routh wrote:
There have been quite a few posts on the slowness of OO in SuSE 8.2. It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common because I'm running OO w/SuSE 8.2 and it is perfectly responsive
The problem is not that OO is just slow - it isn't. The problem is that OO is unusuably slow when setiathome isrunning (even if seti's nice is set quite high). This isn't so unusual, until you consider that it is only in SuSE 8.2 that this seems to be a problem. I had seti going at full blast 24/7 in SuSE 8.0 and 8.1 (and some other distros) and had no problem running OO. Someone else mentioned it worked fine on Libranet (debian) too. So it seems there is a problem when using seti, OO and SuSE 8.2 together. BTW, I compiled my kernel from the SuSE sources, and it didn't make any difference, although my desktop does seem a little quicker than before in general. I'll try a vanilla kernel when I find time, but I don't really feel like all the hoops I have to jump through to get everything going on a vanilla kenel. Hans
. It does take a tiny bit of time to open (a few seconds), but I can't see that any of the OO components behave differently than any other app - speedy. So it must be something that is different on the systems experiencing the slowness. I agree that it probably isn't an OO issue because the OO code you're running and I'm running is the same (I'm using the OO that came with 8.2 and assume you are, too). I clean-installed 8.2, using the standard AMD kernel that came with the distro, ACPI off, and no tweaks. Very standard all the way around. I don't run any distributed computing clients like Seti, so maybe that's it? What about the graphics cards involved - could the difficulty be coming from there perhaps? Mine is a Geforce 2 Ultra 64MB.
Cheers and good luck,
Malke -- Elephant Boy Computers www.elephantboycomputers.com Don't Panic!
On Saturday 31 May 2003 7:48 am, H du Plooy wrote:
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 05:04, Marian Routh wrote:
There have been quite a few posts on the slowness of OO in SuSE 8.2. It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common because I'm running OO w/SuSE 8.2 and it is perfectly responsive
The problem is not that OO is just slow - it isn't. The problem is that OO is unusuably slow when setiathome isrunning (even if seti's nice is set quite high). This isn't so unusual, until you consider that it is only in SuSE 8.2 that this seems to be a problem. I had seti going at full blast 24/7 in SuSE 8.0 and 8.1 (and some other distros) and had no problem running OO. Someone else mentioned it worked fine on Libranet (debian) too.
So it seems there is a problem when using seti, OO and SuSE 8.2 together.
BTW, I compiled my kernel from the SuSE sources, and it didn't make any difference, although my desktop does seem a little quicker than before in general. I'll try a vanilla kernel when I find time, but I don't really feel like all the hoops I have to jump through to get everything going on a vanilla kenel.
Don't bother trying the vanilla kernel unless you have: 1) Patches for xfs (if you're using xfs) 2) Patches to allow the 2.4.20 kernel to compile under gcc 3.3 Anyone know where (2) is?
Hans
. It does take a tiny bit of time to open (a few seconds), but I can't see that any of the OO components behave differently than any other app - speedy. So it must be something that is different on the systems experiencing the slowness. I agree that it probably isn't an OO issue because the OO code you're running and I'm running is the same (I'm using the OO that came with 8.2 and assume you are, too). I clean-installed 8.2, using the standard AMD kernel that came with the distro, ACPI off, and no tweaks. Very standard all the way around. I don't run any distributed computing clients like Seti, so maybe that's it? What about the graphics cards involved - could the difficulty be coming from there perhaps? Mine is a Geforce 2 Ultra 64MB.
Cheers and good luck,
Malke -- Elephant Boy Computers www.elephantboycomputers.com Don't Panic!
-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 05/31/03 10:50 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "An American's a person who isn't afraid to criticize the President - but is always polite to traffic cops."
I'm backing off to 8.1 In addition to your problem's I've found java_vm doesn't work in konq neither does dynamic html. I agree with you. Too many hoops to jump through. I'm convinced all these problems are related. My best guess and it is a guess there is a kde/font/java incompatibility issue. Gary Ernst H du Plooy wrote:
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 05:04, Marian Routh wrote:
There have been quite a few posts on the slowness of OO in SuSE 8.2. It would be interesting to see what, if anything, all of you have in common because I'm running OO w/SuSE 8.2 and it is perfectly responsive
The problem is not that OO is just slow - it isn't. The problem is that OO is unusuably slow when setiathome isrunning (even if seti's nice is set quite high). This isn't so unusual, until you consider that it is only in SuSE 8.2 that this seems to be a problem. I had seti going at full blast 24/7 in SuSE 8.0 and 8.1 (and some other distros) and had no problem running OO. Someone else mentioned it worked fine on Libranet (debian) too.
So it seems there is a problem when using seti, OO and SuSE 8.2 together.
BTW, I compiled my kernel from the SuSE sources, and it didn't make any difference, although my desktop does seem a little quicker than before in general. I'll try a vanilla kernel when I find time, but I don't really feel like all the hoops I have to jump through to get everything going on a vanilla kenel.
Hans
. It does take a tiny bit of time to open (a few seconds), but I can't see that any of the OO components behave differently than any other app - speedy. So it must be something that is different on the systems experiencing the slowness. I agree that it probably isn't an OO issue because the OO code you're running and I'm running is the same (I'm using the OO that came with 8.2 and assume you are, too). I clean-installed 8.2, using the standard AMD kernel that came with the distro, ACPI off, and no tweaks. Very standard all the way around. I don't run any distributed computing clients like Seti, so maybe that's it? What about the graphics cards involved - could the difficulty be coming from there perhaps? Mine is a Geforce 2 Ultra 64MB.
Cheers and good luck,
Malke -- Elephant Boy Computers www.elephantboycomputers.com Don't Panic!
On Saturday 31 May 2003 17:17, Gary Ernst wrote:
I'm backing off to 8.1 In addition to your problem's I've found java_vm doesn't work in konq neither does dynamic html. I agree with you. Too many hoops to jump through. I'm convinced all these problems are related. My best guess and it is a guess there is a kde/font/java incompatibility issue.
Gary Ernst
Does anyone know if this issue - which plagues me as well on 8.2 with OO but *without* seti or distributed.net - has been solved in 9.0? TIA, Nick
I asked this before but received no reply; those others who complaind of OO slowness in 8.2 also seemed to have seti or distributed.net running. I do not, yet OO is exceptionally slow. Someone mentioned there may be a kde/font.java problem in 8.2 - does anyone know if this is fixed in 9.0, or has anyone had smooth sailing with OO in 9 who had problems in 8.2? Thanks in advance, nick On Wednesday 17 December 2003 11:44, Nick Selby wrote:
On Saturday 31 May 2003 17:17, Gary Ernst wrote:
I'm backing off to 8.1 In addition to your problem's I've found java_vm doesn't work in konq neither does dynamic html. I agree with you. Too many hoops to jump through. I'm convinced all these problems are related. My best guess and it is a guess there is a kde/font/java incompatibility issue.
Gary Ernst
Does anyone know if this issue - which plagues me as well on 8.2 with OO but *without* seti or distributed.net - has been solved in 9.0?
TIA, Nick
-- ---------------------------- Nick Selby US Mobile: +1 347 804 4410 Germany: +49 89 2737 4527 Germany Fax: +49 89 2737 4529 *Currently in: MUNICH*
participants (9)
-
Bruce Marshall -
Carlos E. R. -
David Bottrill -
Gary Ernst -
H du Plooy -
John LeMay -
Marian Routh -
Nick Selby -
Paul Benjamin