Re: [equinox-dev] Eclipse Startup Performance

[Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

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 – from 8 seconds with Kepler
SR2, to almost 10 seconds with Mars M5a.
 
We used JProfiler to measure
warmstart performance after a couple of “restarts” 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 who’s the biggest contributors to startup time.
 
We didn’t see any truly
significant performance hit, but still the gentle decrease in performance
does feel like a “death of a 1000 cuts” issue.
Given that M7 is traditionally
a “Performance Milestone”, 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 “Core UI Startup” fingerprint.
Can that be seen as representative
for the average user’s 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 – 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