[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ? |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:10:08 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
"Keith OHara" <address@hidden> writes:
> LilyPond has always been a slower on Windows than under Linux, but I get
> worried if it is more than twice as slow. I would think the operating
> systems affect speed mostly through 1) the font server, 2) memory allocation,
> and 3) the Guile implementation.
>
> I timed one big score, Movement 1 of
> <http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/piece-info.cgi?id=1793>
> 2.16.2 2.17.95
> WinXP 2m 30s 5m 10s
> Fedora 1m 50s 1m 50s
> and do not like the 5m (although I remember version 2.12 taking 20 minutes
> for this movement)
>
> But the timing for another score
> <http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/piece-info.cgi?id=1320>
> comes out more evenly
> 2.16.2 2.17.95
> WinXP 1m 15s 1m 30s
> Fedora 46s 39s
>
> Maybe the first example has some specific quirk, so I'll dig deeper.
> The big change of using skylines for placement around music does not
> cost much when there are no lyrics or other text placed against music.
> Has anyone else noticed a troublesome slowdown?
Have you used the GUB-compiled binary package, or Fedora's built-in or a
self-compiled package? I think that you probably can only make
platform-specific comparisons if you use GUB for all.
Of course, when the speed of our GUB-provided binary for Linux differs
vastly from that of self-compiled binaries, that's also reason for
worrying.
--
David Kastrup