In VS Code, when I run a Julia file, if I have included the library ProfileView via using ProfileView, I get the following warning.
Warning: You are using Gtk on Windows which is currently not recommended. Your REPL/IDE and anything depending on task switches will become sluggish and much slower (up to ~85x slower).
The IDE does become very sluggish.
What should I do to fix this? JuliaPro and Atom are also very slow, and this slowness was why I switched to VS Code (the reason for the slowness may have been different, but I mention this just in case it is useful).
As suggested by the error message, I'm on Windows 10.
per the warning message you are getting, the only way to "fix" this would be to not use a Windows computer. There's nothing you can do about the slow down on Windows with respect to GTK.jl at this time.
Related
I have a 32-bit application and I have a problem with it on Windows 7 x64. I'm loading a DLL. LoadLibraryW succeeds and the subsequent call to GetProcAddress fails with the error code 127 ("procedure not found" or something like that).
The funny part is that I know for a fact the function is exported by the DLL. I made no typos in the GetProcAddress call. I can see the function with Depends.exe and DllExp.exe. The exact same application binary successfully loads the function from the exact same DLL on Windows 10 x64, but not on Windows 7 x64.
Some more details: the library is dbghelp.dll and the "missing" function is MiniDumpWriteDump.
And the fun bit: dbghelp.dll provides API for inspecting the modules loaded into the process and for enumerating functions exported by those modules. So, first I took the HMODULE for this problematic dbghelp.dll and ran
auto ptrSymInitialize = (decltype(&SymInitialize))GetProcAddress(hDbgHelpDll, "SymInitialize");
It worked, this function did load! Then I loaded SymEnumSymbols, written the enumerator callback and finally ran the following to enumerate all the functions in this very `dbghelp.dll":
ptrSymEnum(GetCurrentProcess(), 0, "dbghelp*!*", &Enumerator, nullptr);
And what do you know, MiniDumpWriteDump is, in fact, listed there. Go figure.
Thoughts?
I can see your intent is to use MiniDumpWriteDump. We also make minidumps in our product, and I'm the one to support this.
I would suggest against using dbghelp.dll supplied with OS. First, they tend to be outdated and not support the latest minidump capabilities, which you would want to have. Second, they have proven to be rather unreliable. I believe they simply lack too many bugfixes.
What I found to work quite well is to take dbghelp.dll from Debugging Tools for Windows package (currently part of Windows SDK) and ship it along with our product. This way, I can be sure minidumps will have all the latest features and it works reliably on all OS. It has been some 8 years now, with OS ranging from WinXP to Win10, and I didn't have any issues.
I'm not exactly sure which version of SDK I used to extract the currently used dbghelp.dll, probably it was Win7 SDK. I simply didn't have a reason to update since then. However, we do use Debugging Tools for Windows package from Win10 SDK on Win7 without any issues, so I guess you can use Win10 version as well.
that's exactly what I've been doing, and I didn't bring dbgcore.dll
This was just a plain bad idea. Microsoft makes no effort to make the DLLs that are included with the OS to be backwards compatible. They don't have to. In their implementation, only the interface needs to be compatible. They do take advantage of new capabilities or design changes to improve the implementation.
Like you saw here, a side-effect of the MinWin project. There is no reasonable guess where that ended, if it happens to work now on the Win7 machine then you got lucky. Maybe you won't be so lucky on a Win7 machine without SP1, maybe some minwin glue DLLs are missing on a clean install, maybe the minidump itself is affected negatively some way. Impossible to predict.
So never do this. Afaik you should not be doing this at all, a Win7 machine already has dbghelp.dll available. Not 100% sure, it has been too long and Win7 is rapidly turning into the new XP. If you find it to be necessary then always use the redistributable version. Included with the SDK's Debugging Tools for Windows. Copy it into the same folder as the EXE that needs it so you don't mess up a machine.
Since some years ago I started using Qt in both Windows 7 as well as in Linux Ubuntu and it would always compile fast with MinGW being used for Windows. But in the last couple of years or so, maybe thanks to updates in the version of both Qt and MinGW, I started detecting a slow down in the compiling speed inside Windows. I did some research trying to find why MinGW had started to become so slow compared to Linux (it wasn't before!) and everything people told me was that MinGW was slower in Windows and that it would be better, if possible, to just use Linux.
Since I wanted to continue my project, I followed the suggestion and since I've being using Linux with relatively no problems. The situation now is that I must go back to Windows (now updated to Windows 10) to make visual corrections for this OS and I need to once again work with MinGW having to face the same problem as before.
But for some reason it seems that the slowness of MinGW became even worse! While before I at least was able to compile the app in around 4 minutes, now the last time I tried it took 38 minutes before I gave up and went to sleep - and this is for a project that takes only 1:03 minute to be compiled in Linux [under the same compile configuration]!
Well I'm still aware about the slowness of MinGW, but as a quick research around this problem on the web reveals, that is just too slow: all backtesting one can find in other threads here on SO reveals at best 2x-3x more time to compile a project, not 38x+!!
So I would like to know what kind of possible problems I might have in my Windows for this exaggerated slowness to happen. I know I ended up installing at least 4 different versions of MinGW; could this have brought the problem?
It's interesting also to notice that when compiling using the -j option and watching the Compile Output log in Qt Creator alongside Process Explorer, there are moments when the compiling simple pauses for 10 seconds or more and the CPU usage drops from its ~100% to close to 5% with nothing happening till it suddenly continues the compilation process. I'm sure this constant pauses are part of the above average time, but I have no idea why MinGW is showing this behaviour.
You might want to check where the time is spent.
There a lot of tools that allow you to capture what a certain process is doing, I name just two of them:
ProcMon
XPerf or its successor
But to analyze the reports generated by these tools you need a rather deep understanding. If this doesn't help temporarily disable other running services and program step-by-step (if you want to know which program causes the problem) or disable all of them at once.
Looking at the spikes of cpu usage that TaskManager or Procexp by sysinternals show might help too to identify those components that block your cpu.
If your antivirus is the cause of the collision that makes the compile so slow you can define exceptions, then the antivirus will not scan certain programs or paths.
So perhaps it is easier to first try the compilation process with a disabled antivirus software or even from a clean live boot Windows CD.
I'm currently learning OpenGL and I've noticed a rarely occuring performance problem:
My program is rather small so it's not a performance problem with the code itself, but when I'm running the code via Visual Studio I sometimes only get 1-2 FPS instead of the usual 60.
Once this happens I can restart the program as often as I want to (in debug and release mode alike) and it won't go away.
However, when I close my Firefox (or manually shut down the plugin-container.exe though task manager) and restart my program everything is fine again. After that I can start Firefox again (with the same tabs open) and the bug does not reappear.
I use the newest version of Firefox, and I've had this bug with several programs already - both made by me and others and using different versions of OpenGL. However I don't think I've had this problem when starting a compiled exe directly, but only by using the Run feature of Visual Studio.
I've searched the web but I only found a link about the generally bad performance of this plugin-container.
Does anyone else have this problem? Do you know any walkarounds or fixes?
PS: Regarding isti_spl's answer:
The CPU utilisation of the plugin-container.exe jumps to the 50% limit when the problem happens.
I'm working with Visual Studio, but the problem only occurs when I also have Firefox running (it most certainly is because of this plugin-container, so it probably won't happen with other browsers).
It's hard to isolate the problem because I can't replicate it. It might happen 1 out of 50 times.
I'll see if closing flash-related tabs (youtube, blip.tv etc) fixes the problem next time it happens.
Can you isolate the problem?
You first mentioned running visual studio then firefox. Please try to run separately.
Under FF. is it caused by WebGL or flash plugin? Is it caused by visiting specific sites?
Is it FF specific or happens under other browsers too?
Does CPU utilisation jump high? Please verify that too and which process consumes most CPU.
Not sure, but likely gpu driver + flash problems.
If so, the problem is not in your code, other GL program should be affected too.
I have some customers/candidate who complained that my program doesn't work on their Windows 7 64 bit version (confirmed with screenshots). The errors were strange, for example:
in the trial version i am
getting a error message whenever i
click on \"mark\" \"delete\" \"help\".
error msg is: Access violation at
address 0046C978 in module
\'ideduper.exe.\' read of address
00000004
windows 7 ultimate 64bit. i7 920
#2.67GHz 9gb or ram
'Mark', 'delete' and 'help' are just standard TToolButton on TToolbar.
The other example is failing to get a thumbnail from IExtractImage.
I have told them to try Compatibility mode but still doesn't work.
The problem is when I tested it on Windows 7 HP 64-bit on my computer (which I've done it before released it actually) it just works fine! So I don't know what causing it
Do you have any advice ?Are different Windows package (home basic,premium,ultimate,etc) treating 32 bit prog differently ?Are the newer version of Delphis (I use 2006) more compatible with 64 bit Windows ? Do I need to wait until 64 bit compiler out?
Thanks in advance
Your best bet in my opinion is to add MadExcept or EurekaLog or something similar to your application and give it to the customer to try again. MadExcept will generate log with stack trace, which will give you a clearer view of what is happening there.
To answer 2nd part of the question, 32bit Delphi programs work fine on 64bit Windows 7. I think it's more likely you have some memory management problems and the customer just happens to stumble upon them while you don't. Use FastMM4 to track those down.
Your applications is trying to access an invalid pointer. Changing environment may surface issues that are hidden in others. Check your application, and use FastMM + JCL+JCVL/MadExcept/EurekaLog to get a detailed trace of the issue. Some Windows APIs may have some stricter call requisites under 7 and/or 64 bit, but we would have to know what your app actually cals.
A free alternative to MadExcept is JCL Debug stuff. However it is less thorough and doesn't include the cool dialog box to send the stack trace to you via email, or as a file you can attach and manually email.
MadExcept is worth the money, and it is free for non-commercial use. You could try it first on your own PC, observe its functionality, and be sure it functions the way you want, and then buy it.
If buying Delphi is worth it (and it is!) then buying mad Except is a no brainer. But if you insist on rolling your own, JCLDebug (part of jedi code library) is also pretty nice.
Give them a stripped down version of your app and see when the problem goes away. I am betting it is your code as I never had any problems with my (hundreds of) W7/64 clients.
I'd be willing to bet it's an issue in your code. The reason it's failing on your customer's machine and not yours is that your machine probably has the default Data Execution Protection (DEP) enabled (which is turned on only for essential Windows programs and services), while your customer's computer is actually using DEP as intended (turned on for all programs and services).
The default setting (which is compatible with older versions of Windows, like 95/98/ME), allows software to execute code from what should be data segments. The more strict setting won't allow this, and raises a system-level exception instead.
You can check the settings between the two by looking at System Properties. I'm not at a Win7 machine right now, but on WinXP you get there by right-clicking on My Computer, choosing Properties, clicking on Performance Options, and then selecting the "Data Execution Prevention" tab. Find it on Vista/Win7 by using the Help; search for Data Execution Protection.
The solution, as previous answers have told you, is to install MadExcept or EurekaLog. You can also get a free version as part of JEDI, in JCLDebug IIRC. I haven't used it, so I can't vouch for it personally. I've heard it's pretty good, though.
If you don't want to go that route, set a breakpoint somewhere in the startup portion of your app (make sure to build with debugging info turned on). Run your app until the breakpoint is hit, and then use the IDE's Search->Goto Address (which is disabled until the breakpoint is hit). Enter the address from the exception dialog (not the one that's almost all zeros, but the 0046C978 address, prefixed with $ to indicate it's in hex) as in $0046C978. You'll probably end up in the CPU window looking at assembly code, but you can usually pick out a line of Delphi code of some sort that can sometimes give you a place to start looking.
In addition to all previous suggestions, I'll add the difference in accessing Registry under WOW64 compared to Win32. If your application is accessing Registry to read or write some settings, you should be aware of this. First, take a look at this and this page in the MSDN. On this page you will find 2 flags that determine the access you get to Registry from 32- or 64-bit application. KEY_WOW64_64KEY is the one that you should use.
In any case, I agree with others about using madExcept (or any other similar tool) to be able to find the exact cause of your problems.
I have a Win32 console application which is doing some computations, compiled in Compaq Visual Fortran (which probably doesn't matter).
I need to run a lot of them simultaneously.
In XP, they take around 90-100% CPU together, work very fast.
In Vista, no matter how many of them I run, they take no more than 10% of CPU (together), and work very slow respectively.
There is quite a bit of console output going on, but now VERY much.
I can minimize all the windows, it does not help. CPU is basically doing nothing...
Any ideas?
Update:
No, these are different machines, but they run relatively the same hardware. 2. Threads are not used, this is a VERY OLD (20 yrs) plain app for DOS, compiled in win32. It is supposed to compute iterations until they meet, consume all it has. My impression - VISTA just does NOT GIVE IT MORE CPU
Have you tried redirecting the console output to a file?
If your applications are being held up writing to the console (this happens sometimes unfortunately) then redirecting the output should help, as it's much quicker to write to a simple file than write to the console.
You do this like so
c:\temp> dir > output.log
If you really don't care about the output at all, you can throw it away, by redirecting to nul. eg:
c:\temp> dir > nul
There was a known "feature" in Vista that limits certain console applications to 32MB of RAM. I don't know if those compiled by Compaq Visual Fortran are affected by this "feature."
This article appears to have been updated as recently as October 2008, so the problem still exists.
To expound on Daok's post - your XP machine might be CPU bound for this process, whereas the vista machine is bound by some other resource.
To clarify:
output to stdout (or other) can be slowing down the processing. (as can context switching or file access, etc)
As Tim hinted, console output (stdout) is EXTREMELY expensive.
I suggest rerunning your test while redirecting the console output to a separate log file for each process. If possible, tune down the verbosity of the output in another test run.
Beyond that, there are other obvious possibilities: is the hardware significantly different, are there other major processes running, is there a shared resource that is under contention?
Other than the obvious, look for a nonobvious resource contention such as a shared file.
But the main area where I would look is whether there is a significant difference in how your code is compiled for the two OS environments--I wonder if your Fortran code is incurring some kind of special penalty when running on Vista, such as a compatibility mode. Look to see how well Vista is supported and whether you can target your compile for Vista specifically. Also look for anyone reporting similar issues, such as in bug reports, feature requests, etc.
Your loops are obviously not simple computations. There is a blocking system call in there somewhere. Just because it worked on XP doesn't mean the app is bug free.
Since you can minimize the console windows and see no improvement, I would not consider that an issue. In my experience console output slows a program down only if the console window is drawing text, not when it's minimized.
Is it the same machine hardware on your Vista and XP? It might use just 10% of the Vista because it doesn't require more. Are you using Thread? I think it requires more information about your project to have a better idea. Have you try to use a profiler to see what's going on?