[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] Eclipse Startup Performance

Hi Martin,

There are no plans as of now to work on a performance issue at the framework level.  I'm not saying I would not work on a performance issue, just that I am unaware of a performance issue in the framework that contributes to the slowdown you have observed.  I'm not sure how to interpret the PDF you sent.  I'm unsure what the various columns mean.  My guess is that each release we have more bundles with more classes to load which contribute to more time to start.

This is especially true if you are comparing Luna vs Mars and see a slower time to start.  The Luna and Mars framework implementations are virtually identical so my initial guess is we are loading more code to start Eclipse.

Tom





From:        "Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        "equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "platform-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <platform-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:        03/26/2015 08:40 AM
Subject:        [equinox-dev] Eclipse Startup Performance
Sent by:        equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




Hello Equinox and Platform/UI committers,
 
We recently measured startup performance of our IDE based on Eclipse. We measured 4 milestones:
-          20140325 (based on Kepler SR2),
-          20141014 (based on Luna SR1),
-          20150224 (based on Luna SR2)
-          20150224+mars (based on Mars M5a).
 
Attached are the findings in summary:  for each milestone, the left-hand column has CPU time in milliseconds, relative % within the milestone, and the delta compared to the previous milestone.
The sad news are that startup performance got worse on every iteration â from 8 seconds with Kepler SR2, to almost 10 seconds with Mars M5a.
 
We used JProfiler to measure warmstart performance after a couple of ârestartsâ into a Workspace that includes a C/C++ project and had an editor open.
Then, in JProfiler we filtered-out any JDK and JFace packages and made their numbers aggregate up to the callers;
Finally, we accumulated numbers by package prefix to see whoâs the biggest contributors to startup time.
 
We didnât see any truly significant performance hit, but still the gentle decrease in performance does feel like a âdeath of a 1000 cutsâ issue.
Given that M7 is traditionally a âPerformance Milestoneâ, I was wondering what the committers thought:
Are there any known performance issues that were already planned to be addressed ?
 
Looking at http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops4/S-4.5M6-201503200800/performance/performance.php
I see a 5.8% performance decrease on the âCore UI Startupâ fingerprint.
Can that be seen as representative for the average userâs IDE startup experience ? How would it compare to a Kepler, or Eclipse 3.8.2 baseline ?
 
I would be interested in hearing any thoughts.
 
Thanks!
Martin
--
Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Owner â Development Tools, Wind River
direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6[attachment "201502.pdf" deleted by Thomas Watson/Austin/IBM] _______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev