Re: Mathematica v6: Slower in the following fields

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg75806] Re: Mathematica v6: Slower in the following fields*From*: "alexxx.magni at gmail.com" <alexxx.magni at gmail.com>*Date*: Fri, 11 May 2007 05:22:11 -0400 (EDT)*References*: <200705090828.EAA13415@smc.vnet.net><f1uojp$87t$1@smc.vnet.net>

Hi everybody, thank you for the useful info. To get a more correct comparison, I'm giving you a comparison 6.0 vs. 5.2 under Linux, using, for the Mathematica processes running: vsz virtual memory size of the process in KiB (1024-byte units). rss resident set size, the non-swapped physical memory that a task has used (in kiloBytes). For 5.2: --------------------------------------------------------------------- (VSZ) ( RSS) 8172 24240 Mathematica 12312 44264 MathKernel (dopo apertura Help): 9304 25184 Mathematica 12312 44264 MathKernel In[1]:=img=Table[Random[Integer],{400},{249}]; 11704 27500 Mathematica 16756 48532 MathKernel In[2]:=ListDensityPlot[img,Mesh->False,AspectRatio->Automatic] 11580 27304 Mathematica 16952 48624 MathKernel ... so we went from ~ (8/24 + 12/44) MB to (11/27 + 17/49) MB for (Mathematica + MathKernel). The new situation is instead: For 6.0: --------------------------------------------------------------------- 36920 146980 Mathematica 14412 149840 MathKernel 29992 481012 java (dopo apertura Help): 40388 150152 Mathematica 31216 166456 MathKernel 38948 509044 java In[1]:= img = RandomInteger[1, {400, 249}]; 42468 152148 Mathematica 31648 166848 MathKernel 39400 509044 java In[2]:= ListDensityPlot[img, Mesh -> False, AspectRatio -> Automatic] 58144 169816 Mathematica 282284 418064 MathKernel 39400 509044 java Therefore (in MB): 5.2 6.0 VSZ RSS VSZ RSS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- start 8 24 37 147 [Mathematica] 12 44 14 150 [MathKernel] 30 48 [java] finish 11 27 58 170 [Mathematica] 17 49 280 418 [MathKernel] 39 509 [java] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now I see why I had to shut it down after a few more calculations! The frontend is relatively stable, while both the kernel and java (java? Why?) exploded in memory usage. I still have to try the additional option you suggested, I'll let you know - but something is clearly wrong here, considering the small size of the object I'm trying to plot... thanks! Alessandro P.S. Even worse problems I had using ListContourPlot, which I cannot quantify since it slows my machine to a crawl forcing me to kill the process (LCPlot using a more regular image, of course) Chris Chiasson ha scritto: > Are you manually setting PlotPoints in 6.0? In the new version, > PlotPoints *seems* to mean something different than it did in 5.2 > (i.e. lots more subdivisions per plotpoint). > > On 5/9/07, alexxx.magni at gmail.com <alexxx.magni at gmail.com> wrote: > > I installed v6, but had to return to 5.2 since - for some works I was > > doing - the new version has become unacceptably slow. Now I changed my > > mind and I keep both versions on, depending on what I have to do. > > > > I'd like to start this thread to see people post their observations > > about what has become slower in v6 - and of course what is faster too! > > > > e.g. some posts ago I saw somebody having problems with eigenvalues > > calculations. > > > > My problems, just to start, relate to graphics. Dealing with large > > images with ListContourPlot, for example, is really slower (had to > > kill the calculation). And ListDensityPlot is barely acceptable. > > > > So... please, add your experience here! > > > > Alessandro Magni > > > > > > > > > -- > http://chris.chiasson.name/

**References**:**Mathematica v6: Slower in the following fields***From:*"alexxx.magni@gmail.com" <alexxx.magni@gmail.com>