Bug 273308 - [perfs] Save very slow because DeltaProcessor#resourceChanged(..) resolves classpath
Summary: [perfs] Save very slow because DeltaProcessor#resourceChanged(..) resolves cl...
Status: VERIFIED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: JDT
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: 3.5   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 major (vote)
Target Milestone: 3.5 M7   Edit
Assignee: Jerome Lanneluc CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: performance
: 274232 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks: 270784 270824
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2009-04-22 13:32 EDT by Markus Keller CLA
Modified: 2009-04-29 16:42 EDT (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
trace (11.60 KB, application/x-zip-compressed)
2009-04-22 13:32 EDT, Markus Keller CLA 		no flags Details
Proposed fix (11.72 KB, patch)
2009-04-23 06:46 EDT, Jerome Lanneluc CLA 		no flags Details | Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Markus Keller CLA 2009-04-22 13:32:25 EDT 
Created attachment 132815 [details]
trace

I20090421-0930, I guess this is a consequence of the fix for bug 271102

With this build, normal Save actions in a Java Editor often take a long time. I took a trace (sampling) and saw that most of the 4 seconds were spent in DeltaProcessor#resourceChanged(IResourceChangeEvent), split up in two invocations, one from the CleanUp (Save Action), and the other from the actual save operation.
Comment 1 Frederic Fusier CLA 2009-04-23 03:42:30 EDT 
This regression is also seen in our JDT/Core model performance test: testCloseProject() (see bug 270784).
Comment 2 Jerome Lanneluc CLA 2009-04-23 06:46:58 EDT 
Created attachment 132915 [details]
Proposed fix
Comment 3 Frederic Fusier CLA 2009-04-23 07:07:12 EDT 
(In reply to comment #2)
> Created an attachment (id=132915) [details]
> Proposed fix
> 
Here are the numbers I get for the Elapsed Process:
v_949 + bug 270784 fix: 1.08s  (95% in [997ms, 1.16s])
v_950:                  7.14s  (95% in [6.69s, 7.59s]) 
v_950 + proposed fix:   0.992s (95% in [885ms, 1.1s])
Comment 4 Frederic Fusier CLA 2009-04-23 09:50:52 EDT 
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Created an attachment (id=132915) [details] [details]
> > Proposed fix
> > 
> Here are the numbers I get for the Elapsed Process:
> v_949 + bug 270784 fix: 1.08s  (95% in [997ms, 1.16s])
> v_950:                  7.14s  (95% in [6.69s, 7.59s]) 
> v_950 + proposed fix:   0.992s (95% in [885ms, 1.1s])
> 
As per Jerome's remark, I forgot to say that these numbers are times for the JDT/Core perf test testCloseProjects()...
Comment 5 Jerome Lanneluc CLA 2009-04-23 11:31:37 EDT 
Fix released for 3.5M7
Comment 6 Kent Johnson CLA 2009-04-28 12:36:14 EDT 
Verified for 3.5M7 using Frederic's performance numbers
Comment 7 David Green CLA 2009-04-29 16:42:36 EDT 
*** Bug 274232 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***