| Eclipse performance on Pentium M under Linux/GTK? [message #119880] |
Mon, 24 November 2003 03:48  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: thatEclipseUser.yahoo.com
As an long-time Smalltalk hacker I really enjoy Eclipse. However, the 3M4
Eclipse I'm using under Linux/GTK is barely fast enough to be acceptable
on my 2.4G P4 machine (admittedly it's running in a 512M VMWare
partition). I need to get a notebook and I'm wondering if anyone can
report their experience of running Eclipse on a Centrino/Pentium M (e.g.
an IBM X31 or T40) under Linux. Is a P M 1.4G equivalent to a 2.4 P4 (as
some benchmarks would suggest) in this case? Do I need to get the more
expensive 1.6G version?
I don't know anyone who has one of these, otherwise I'd just borrow it and
find out for myself...
I'm trying to keep this already expensive notebook from getting any more
expensive - any thoughts would be welcome. Thanks.
One interesting aside, btw - I did get a chance to install the 3M5 build
on a friend's G4 867 Powerbook (768M RAM) running OSX 10.3. I'd heard that
Eclipse was slow on OSX, but didn't find it bad at all (definitely faster
than the GTK version on my 2.4 P4, but slower than the windows version.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Eclipse performance on Pentium M under Linux/GTK? [message #132116 is a reply to message #122876] |
Wed, 07 January 2004 15:11  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:47:49 +0100, Jimisola Laursen wrote:
>> I would suggest sticking with the R2.1.2 release of eclipse at the moment.
>> In my experience the recent 3.x builds are slower than the 2.1.2 builds.
>
> I have used Eclipse for almost a year now starting of with 2.x, 3.0Mx (x
> currentlty being 4).
> We have discussed Eclipse in our project group and there are two things
> that always come up: performance and stability.
>
> Eclipse 3.x feels runs and feels slower under Linux than under Windows
> for example.
> It makes me wonder how is due to Eclipse itself and how is because of
> the (Sun's) JVM?
>
> For stability, maybe one should have used 2.1.2 release, but doing that
> you also missed out on some pretty nice 3.x build features. It almost
> feels as if M4 should have been Stable release, i.e. 3.1. And then work
> continued with 3.2 (i.e. today's M5).
>
> Regards,
> Jimisola
I found that m6 was substantially slower than m5, which was modestly
slower than m4. I added some vmargs to my eclipse startup script, and my
performance with m6 is now acceptable.
As was mentioned in another post,
http://performance.netbeans.org/howto/jvmswitches/index.html has hints on
tuning the jvm for a big GUI app.
I also noticed that by bumping the max memory allocation way up, some of
my call hierarchy searches that failed before are now completing. These
settings may not help if you're memory constrained, and I crashed my
machine a few times while tweaking with more advanced settings.
I found documentation on the eclipse command line arguments in the eclipse
help browser. It would be nice if you could do eclipse --help and get the
same info. Vote for http://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=25334 if
you also think so.
#!/bin/bash
/usr/local/eclipse/eclipse -vm /usr/local/j2sdk1.4.2_01/bin/java -vmargs
-Xverify:none -Xmx512m -Xms128m -XX:PermSize=30m -XX:CompileThreshold=10
-XX:+UseParallelGC
|
|
|
| Re: Eclipse performance on Pentium M under Linux/GTK? [message #132143 is a reply to message #132076] |
Wed, 07 January 2004 16:32 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Riyad Kalla wrote:
> Thanks for that link, it was a very interesting read. I have been driven
> crazy by the performance of Eclipse-GTK recently and hope that the team is
> able to uncover SOMETHING that will help in the future.
I'm a Debian user and I've just had an Eclipse meltdown. The latest 2.1.2
release crashes frequently (errors available for the interested) and I
tried recompiling the 3M6 release but that's not much better (again, .log
availble for interested parties). I built 3M6 myself, so as to eliminate
the possibilities of libary issues.
I've had to switch over to 3M6 on Windows, which I'm not too happy about
doing.
Vik :v)
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04730 seconds
Home