SN 5.0 very slow on NT4.0

SN 5.0 very slow on NT4.0

[Subrata Datta]

SN 5.0 seems to be very slow in NT 4.0. Please advise if I'm 
missing something.
SN4.5.2 was not slow as much.

subrata.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Re: SN 5.0 very slow on NT4.0

[Mo DeJong]

On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Subrata Datta wrote:

> SN 5.0 seems to be very slow in NT 4.0. Please advise if I'm 
> missing something.
> SN4.5.2 was not slow as much.
> 
> subrata.

That is really odd. We have seen 5.0 running much more
quickly than 4.5. Is there any chance you are running
Source-Navigator from inside Cygwin? We did notice
a serious slowdown in that case. Are you using any
sort of remote display program?

Mo

Re: SN 5.0 very slow on NT4.0

[Subrata Datta]

Yes I was running it from bash(from cygwin) prompt  on NT 4.0 
will try it from dos promt and let you konw. 

thanks a lot for the quick repsonse!! (this is the power of open
src!!)

regards,
subrata.

--- Mo DeJong <mdejong@cygnus.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Subrata Datta wrote:
> 
> > SN 5.0 seems to be very slow in NT 4.0. Please advise if I'm 
> > missing something.
> > SN4.5.2 was not slow as much.
> > 
> > subrata.
> 
> That is really odd. We have seen 5.0 running much more
> quickly than 4.5. Is there any chance you are running
> Source-Navigator from inside Cygwin? We did notice
> a serious slowdown in that case. Are you using any
> sort of remote display program?
> 
> Mo


=====
Subrata Datta
----------------           
neeam@yahoo.com
sdatta@ciena.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Re: SN 5.0 very slow on NT4.0

[Mo DeJong]

On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Subrata Datta wrote:

> Yes I was running it from bash(from cygwin) prompt  on NT 4.0 
> will try it from dos promt and let you konw. 

Well, that would be a good thing to mention in the bug
report ;)

> thanks a lot for the quick repsonse!! (this is the power of open
> src!!)

I don't know if it the "power of open source" as much as
as the fact that I ran into that same problem the very
first time I ran SN 5.0 on Windows. I could not believe how
god awful slow it was, running snavigator.exe from the
explorer shell fixed the problem.

Mo DeJong
Red Hat Inc

Re: SN 5.0 very slow on NT4.0

[Subrata Datta]

Hi 
     I tried  running  from dos promt and SN could not start.
error message is "SN failed to start". what wrong here..

subrata.

--- Mo DeJong <mdejong@cygnus.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Subrata Datta wrote:
> 
> > Yes I was running it from bash(from cygwin) prompt  on NT 4.0 
> > will try it from dos promt and let you konw. 
> 
> Well, that would be a good thing to mention in the bug
> report ;)
> 
> explorer shell fixed the problem.
> 
> Mo DeJong
> Red Hat Inc


=====
Subrata Datta
----------------           
neeam@yahoo.com
sdatta@ciena.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

snav:History-->grep

[Subrata Datta]

When I pulled down History-->grep--><some sysmbol> snav 
initiates a new grep . In sn4.5.2 it used to get the info 
from cache.  

did  I miss something here in term of config. parameter. 

I did not alter cache info. that comes default. 

regards,
subrata.





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Re: snav:History-->grep

[Mo DeJong]

On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Subrata Datta wrote:

> When I pulled down History-->grep--><some sysmbol> snav 
> initiates a new grep . In sn4.5.2 it used to get the info 
> from cache.  
> 
> did  I miss something here in term of config. parameter. 
> 
> I did not alter cache info. that comes default. 

The grep cache feature was removed in 5.0. It was
a bad idea since it meant the results you were looking
at might no longer exits. It also wasted loads of
memory.

Mo DeJong
Red Hat Inc

Re: snav:History-->grep

[Subrata Datta]

Thanks for the info. Removing grep cache is a little too far shot 
in my humble opinion. It would have been nice to have this feature
as option. 

regards,
SD

--- Mo DeJong <mdejong@cygnus.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Subrata Datta wrote:
> 
> > When I pulled down History-->grep--><some sysmbol> snav 
> > initiates a new grep . In sn4.5.2 it used to get the info 
> > from cache.  
> > 
> > did  I miss something here in term of config. parameter. 
> > 
> > I did not alter cache info. that comes default. 
> 
> The grep cache feature was removed in 5.0. It was
> a bad idea since it meant the results you were looking
> at might no longer exits. It also wasted loads of
> memory.
> 
> Mo DeJong
> Red Hat Inc


=====
Subrata Datta
----------------           
neeam@yahoo.com
sdatta@ciena.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Re: snav:History-->grep

[Mo DeJong]

On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Subrata Datta wrote:

> Thanks for the info. Removing grep cache is a little too far shot 
> in my humble opinion. It would have been nice to have this feature
> as option. 
> 
> regards,
> SD

Well, you are welcome to add it back in for your own version.
There are some real problems with storing the entire output
of grep in the project file, so be warned. Also, the code
that managed the grep history and pushing and popping of the
grep results is quite nasty. There is a hack in there that
was meant to keep it working with 4.5 generated project
files (it just ignored grep results in the history and
automatically reran the grep). My question is, why
do you need that feature?

Mo DeJong
Red Hat Inc

Re: snav:History-->grep

[Khamis Abuelkomboz (UUNET)]

I join Subrata in the case, that storing the grep history
was very usefull, especially when you are having a large
project. One grep is usually enough to get back to results
at later time.  It's even the decide of the user to make
a new grep, when he believes that the grep was no longer
valid.
Another case how I used grep history is to look what I greped
before and if I made changes correct!

Mo, I Agree with you that storing grep history took a big place,
however I would limit storing history entries up to as example
100 entries.

khamis


Mo DeJong wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Subrata Datta wrote:
> 
> 
>> Thanks for the info. Removing grep cache is a little too far shot 
>> in my humble opinion. It would have been nice to have this feature
>> as option. 
>> 
>> regards,
>> SD
> 
> 
> Well, you are welcome to add it back in for your own version.
> There are some real problems with storing the entire output
> of grep in the project file, so be warned. Also, the code
> that managed the grep history and pushing and popping of the
> grep results is quite nasty. There is a hack in there that
> was meant to keep it working with 4.5 generated project
> files (it just ignored grep results in the history and
> automatically reran the grep). My question is, why
> do you need that feature?
> 
> Mo DeJong
> Red Hat Inc