Bug 69338 - Text compare CPU/Memory leak
Summary: Text compare CPU/Memory leak
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 92561
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Compare (show other bugs)
Version: 3.0   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows 2000
: P3 major (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Andre Weinand CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: performance
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-07-06 03:27 EDT by Emmanuel Lepavec CLA
Modified: 2005-04-25 11:19 EDT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Emmanuel Lepavec CLA 2004-07-06 03:27:34 EDT
I have a big problem when using the Local History feature, the CPU usage grows
bigger and bigger (I have an Athlon 2800+ and 768 megs of RAM) and Eclipse lags
horribly ('Computing Differences...')! I'm not sure if the memory is affected
but it's mainly a CPU consumption problem (if there is a memory leak it's not
big I think...).

The problem do not appear the first time I use the Local History but at the
second time and later... Then when I'm able to close the Local History, Eclipse
takes so much CPU time I have to close (when possible, sometimes I have to kill
it...) and restart it! 

To reproduce the problem, take a big source file (at least 2000+ lines), modify
it heavily with repeated saves in a long time span in order to build a big
history then try to open the Local History at least twice (on a big part, for
example the class, not just a single method)...

Note that the problem was already present in Eclipse 2.1.*.
Comment 1 John Arthorne CLA 2005-01-06 11:23:42 EST
By the "computing differences" label it looks like this is caused by the text
diff algorithm.  I believe it is a known issue that it performs poorly on large
files with many changes.  Some improvements were made in this area for 3.0.
Moving to compare component for further comment.
Comment 2 Tod Creasey CLA 2005-03-07 11:54:14 EST
If this is not a performance issue please remove the performance keyword as we
are now tracking these more closely.
Comment 3 Tod Creasey CLA 2005-03-07 11:57:21 EST
Adding my name to the cc list as we are now tracking performance issues more
closely. Please remove the performance keyword if this is not a performance bug.
Comment 4 Mike Wilson CLA 2005-04-25 10:54:43 EDT
It sounds like there should be another PR that covers the "known issue" described by John. I searched 
briefly for one, but did not see it. If so, please mark this one as a dup and close. If not, this one should 
be anotated with the description of the issue.
Comment 5 Andre Weinand CLA 2005-04-25 11:19:23 EDT

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 92561 ***