Re: imagemagick 6.8.9.8-1 is slower than 6.8.9.7-1

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



Hi

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Matthew Wynn <m-wynn@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> As shown in the forum post I linked, here is a strace for 6.8.9.7:
>
>  $ strace -c convert /tmp/test.jpg -limit thread 4 -thumbnail
> 100x100 -gravity center -background none -extent 100x100
> /tmp/mpdcover.png
> % time     seconds  usecs/call     calls    errors syscall
> ------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
> 100.00    0.000033           1        47           read
>   0.00    0.000000           0         3           write
>   0.00    0.000000           0        84        31 open
>   0.00    0.000000           0        54           close
>   0.00    0.000000           0        12         3 stat
>   0.00    0.000000           0        52           fstat
>   0.00    0.000000           0        10           lseek
>   0.00    0.000000           0       117           mmap
>   0.00    0.000000           0        72           mprotect
>   0.00    0.000000           0        25           munmap
>   0.00    0.000000           0         9           brk
>   0.00    0.000000           0        11           rt_sigaction
>   0.00    0.000000           0        19           rt_sigprocmask
>   0.00    0.000000           0         4         1 access
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           clone
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           execve
>   0.00    0.000000           0         2           getdents
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           getcwd
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           readlink
>   0.00    0.000000           0         2           getrlimit
>   0.00    0.000000           0        18           times
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           arch_prctl
>   0.00    0.000000           0         8           futex
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           sched_getaffinity
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           set_tid_address
>   0.00    0.000000           0         2         1 openat
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           set_robust_list
> ------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
> 100.00    0.000033                   559        36 total
>
> and for 6.8.9.8
> $ strace -c convert /tmp/test.jpg -limit thread 4 -thumbnail
> 100x100 -gravity center -background none -extent 100x100
> /tmp/mpdcover.png
> % time     seconds  usecs/call     calls    errors syscall
> ------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
>  56.99    0.001325          29        46           munmap
>  43.01    0.001000          18        56           futex
>   0.00    0.000000           0        50           read
>   0.00    0.000000           0         4           write
>   0.00    0.000000           0        89        31 open
>   0.00    0.000000           0        59           close
>   0.00    0.000000           0        23        13 stat
>   0.00    0.000000           0        55           fstat
>   0.00    0.000000           0        10           lseek
>   0.00    0.000000           0       139           mmap
>   0.00    0.000000           0        76           mprotect
>   0.00    0.000000           0        12           brk
>   0.00    0.000000           0        11           rt_sigaction
>   0.00    0.000000           0        19           rt_sigprocmask
>   0.00    0.000000           0         5         1 access
>   0.00    0.000000           0         9           madvise
>   0.00    0.000000           0         3           clone
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           execve
>   0.00    0.000000           0         2           getdents
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           getcwd
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           readlink
>   0.00    0.000000           0         2           getrlimit
>   0.00    0.000000           0        56           times
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           arch_prctl
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           sched_getaffinity
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           set_tid_address
>   0.00    0.000000           0         2         1 openat
>   0.00    0.000000           0         1           set_robust_list
> ------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
> 100.00    0.002325                   735        46 total
>

The strace output says that cpu time spent by the syscall in kernel is
small (2.3 ms) so the rest is spent in userspase. You need a profiler (e.g.
perf) get more information. Run "perf record -g $YOUR_COMMAND" then "perf
report" and "perf annotate". "perf annotate" shows better results if you
recompile imagemagick with debug symbols enabled.

I highly recommend to learn perf (independently of this issue), it is very
powerful and useful development tool. See more information here
https://perf.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Tutorial


>
> If you have a specific perf command that would be more revealing?
>
> > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 19:54:21 -0700
> > From: anatol.pomozov@xxxxxxxxx
> > To: arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [arch-general] imagemagick 6.8.9.8-1 is slower than
> 6.8.9.7-1
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Matthew Wynn <m-wynn@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > After upgrading to imagemagick 6.8.9.8-1, I've found it to be a lot
> slower
> > > than 6.8.9.7-1.  I only get this issue when downloading from the
> > > repositories or using the PKGBUILD, not when compiling using the
> > > instructions at imagemagic.org.
> > >
> > > I've discussed the issue with the ImageMagick developers, which you can
> > > find at
> > >
> http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=26369&sid=a29400f51bd723e98da6b74c0819e9b3
> .
> > > Even when trying to convert a 500x500 image to 100x100, it appears
> that an
> > > image that is 2048x1536 is created.
> > >
> > > I've tried this on multiple Arch machines with the same result.
> > >
> >
> > Use code profiler (e.g. 'perf') to record information where the tool
> spends
> > its CPU cycles. Then compare what is the difference and why newer version
> > is slower.
>
>


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux