[Xastir] Xastir -CPU

[Gerry Creager N5JXS]

I'm beginning to think the answer to this is to convert the cygwin boxen 
to Linux and hide WINE behind the appropriate games.  I changed the icon 
and name of openoffice on the Windoze desktop to 'Office' and my wife 
and kids are perfectly happy...  I'm gonna sneak in a different hard 
drive with FC2 or SuSE 9.1 on it and see if they notice that...

Just a random thought.
gerry

Tom Russo wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 07:17:53PM -0700, a Mr. Richard Feyler of Fort Lee, New Jersey <archer at eskimo.com> writes 'Dear Rosanne Rosannadanna':
> 
>>On Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Tom Russo wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Windows 2000, on another 2GHz machine with 640MB ram, we're looking at
>>>80%-90% CPU usage with the only feed being the server port on the above home
>>>machine.  Spikes up to 90+% every time there's a packet received or an expose
>>>event, drops to around 82% and stays there when everything's quiet.  X doesn't
>>>eat that CPU when xastir is not running, but it's clearly related to xastir's
>>>use of X.
>>
>>Henk de Groot has been keeping me informed of such things.  I think
>>he may do a bit more work on getting that CPU usage down on Cygwin.
>>I have a hard time finding test machines to do it with.
> 
> 
> That's why the kid has a computer, so Dad can have an extra test platform 
> without actually claiming to own a Losedows box.  
> 
> 
>>If you get a chance though, crank up "nexttime" in
>>main.c:UpdateTime() to see if it helps on Cygwin.  Henk was doing
>>some of that and got it down to 30% or so.  If you can do a bit more
>>and track down where the CPU is really getting used, that'd be even
>>better.  We can put in Cygwin-specific delays once we find the
>>culprit, or code around the problem.
> 
> 
> Xastir is, in fact, using very, very little of the CPU on windows.
> 
> Looking at Windows Task Manager, xastir rides around 1-5% of the CPU.  Where 
> all that time is being eaten is in the "System" process, and it is indeed very
> sensitive to nexttime in UpdateTime.
> 
> With the Cygwin X server running, total system load sits around 2-40% 
> (spiking whenever doing complex tasks like raising the bash window to the
> front).
> 
> At nexttime=2, upon startup xastir floats at single digit CPU percentage,
> while System eats nearer to 70%, and the total system load as shown by the
> performance monitor is nearer 90%.
> 
> At nexttime=20, System  hovers a bit lower, xastir stays in the single 
> digits, but average system load is stil near 65%.
> 
> At nexttime=50, System is bouncing around between  50-60%, and average system
> load is bouncing between 40 and 50%.  This is with a single internet server,
> connected directly to my copy of xastir running on a real OS, which is 
> currently getting data from a TNC,  heavily filtered aprs2.net and firenet 
> feeds over dialup.  Shutting off the internet server does not, in fact, 
> change the total CPU utilization very much at all (a percent point or less).
> 
> Last test I did was with nexttime=200, which appears to get the total 
> CPU usage down to 15-25%.  The little red arrow in the interface graphic
> on the bottom right doesn't flicker at the epilepsy-inducing rate it does when
> running with much lower nexttimes, but other than that the thing does
> seem to be working Just Fine and not consuming the machine.  "System" 
> is still the dominant process, xastir is still in the single digits in CPU %.
> 
> Gonna leave it running overnight and see how it looks in the morning.
> 
> Oh, and BTW --- with the TNC feed, the filterd aprs2 and firenet feeds, and
> the connection to the losedows box, my BSD xastir is hovering at 0.3-0.8% CPU 
> utilization, with 15 hour uptime.
> 

-- 
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University	
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578
Page: 979.228.0173
Office: 903A Eller Bldg, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843