Re: [Gramps-users] Fwd:Gramps 3.0 takes for ever to make an action

[Lee M. <Le...@lo...>]

Also I used a database that has a power of 10 less people 17000 still a good
size though. I will try again with the other database to see if it was the
database and if it does go wrong I will try using a previous version of the
data to see if it is something in the database that is corrupted. Thanks for
every ones help.

Lee Myers

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Lee Myers <Le...@lo...> wrote:

> It was solved with reinstalling the program was broken some how. It all
> runs great I haven't tried any of the gramplets yet so that was not the
> problem.
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Adrian <
> gra...@ju...> wrote:
>
> > Benny
> >
> > There is most definitely a delay when using the pedigree view on
> > generations as high as 13. THis is the stats for the pedigree of my son
> > Breakdown by generation:
> >     Generation 1 has 1 of 1 individual (100.00% complete)
> >     Generation 2 has 2 of 2 individuals (100.00% complete)
> >     Generation 3 has 4 of 4 individuals (100.00% complete)
> >     Generation 4 has 8 of 8 individuals (100.00% complete)
> >     Generation 5 has 16 of 16 individuals (100.00% complete)
> >     Generation 6 has 29 of 32 individuals (90.62% complete)
> >     Generation 7 has 44 of 64 individuals (68.75% complete)
> >     Generation 8 has 53 of 128 individuals (41.41% complete)
> >     Generation 9 has 31 of 256 individuals (12.11% complete)
> >     Generation 10 has 24 of 512 individuals (4.69% complete)
> >     Generation 11 has 14 of 1024 individuals (1.37% complete)
> >     Generation 12 has 6 of 2048 individuals (0.29% complete)
> >     Generation 13 has 4 of 4096 individuals (0.10% complete)
> > All generations have 236 individuals
> >
> > I wonder if it is trying to make 8191 calls to find these. The stranger
> > fact is that this delay/seize-up/whatever happens after a short delay of
> > the pedigree window opening on such a large pedigree. Perhaps it is to
> > do with the linking into the rest of the the database (ie the ability to
> > left click to select and right click to open that individual.
> >
> > I did not know of the nuber of generations parameter and I will use it
> > in future, though I do like the complete pedigree as I can then select
> > all and paste it into the website. I think this pedigree snapshot would
> > do great as a report ( perhaps with DOB and DOD included) or in the
> > narrative Web site
> >
> > I am on an AMD Duron 1.3 Mhz, 1Gb RAM
> >
> > THanks for the pedigree view, I know I asked for it in the first place
> > and I love it
> >
> > Adrian
> > On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 20:19 +0200, Benny Malengier wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2008/4/14, Douglas S. Blank <db...@cs...>:
> > >         Adrian wrote:
> > >         > Hi All,
> > >         >
> > >         > I have found that I have a similar problem when I use the
> > >         pedigree
> > >         > gramplet on a person with a large direct ancestry. When I
> > >         close this the
> > >         > speed is back to a normal comfortable rate. Is this the case
> > >         with you
> > >         > Lee?
> > >         >
> > >         > I have a database of only 1000 people, though processor is a
> > >         bit slower,
> > >         > yet this is the only time I experience this delay.
> > >
> > >
> > >         Adrian,
> > >
> > >         How far back does that lineage go? You can change the depth
> > >         that the
> > >         Pedigree Gramplet displays by editing ~/.gramps/keys.ini to
> > >         make it less
> > >         than 100. That code is just about as fast as possible, so it
> > >         may be that
> > >         your computer is just too slow for that functionality.
> > >
> > > Is it not recursive? That can bog it down no? Although 1000 is a small
> > > db, every call has it's own memory block. If many users encounter
> > > problem we should add perhaps a way to set this nr of generations in
> > > GRAMPS (context menu on the gramplet with some choices? ) and default
> > > to eg only 10, or a rewrite in some way to keep memory fixed (if
> > > recursive).
> > > Anyway, perhaps some further research too into the parallel messages.
> > > If screen updates during calculation, users would not perceive it as
> > > slow.
> > >
> > >
> > >         (What is the speed of your processor, if you don't mind me
> > >         asking? I
> > >         develop on a pretty old computer, but I'd like to get an idea
> > >         of what
> > >         kind of computer this kind of functionality is not enough.)
> > >
> > >         -Doug
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/
> Go ahead check it out!
>



-- 
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/
Go ahead check it out!