20 July 2008

Performance Poll

Today I'd like everyone following this blog (or accidentily reading this) to take part in a small poll. I'm interested in subjective performance feed back.

Please answer the following questions using a comment post:
  1. Is Liferea loading feeds / search folders quickly enough?
  2. How many feed subscriptions do you have?
  3. What is the longest unresponsiveness in seconds when you use Liferea. Please name the feature causing it.
Just post something like

no, 100, 5s clicking on "Unread" search folder...

You can post comments anonymously!

29 comments:

powered_by_tux said...

1. Feed loading gets slow after using Liferea for a long time. Maybe it's because it saves feed articles from about a month ago. Caching options don't seem to work. How about a (freely configurable) purging feature depending on the age of an article?

2. A counter would be useful for this. Anyway, I have counted 34 subscriptions.

3. Liferea is unresponsive for about 5 seconds when using the feed updating function. Also, displaying subscriptions with a lot of articles takes a long time.

Jaffer said...

1. In general Liferea is loading quickly enough, unless it has an unresponsive feed it tries to read. It can take minutes to get past such a feed.
I do not search within Liferea.

2. A little less than 150 feeds

3. Sometimes Liferea starts up unresponsive (in Ubuntu Hardy) it doesn't load anything and can only be closed and started up again.

Anonymous said...

no, 160, clicking on a folder with lots of feeds in it can take several seconds ("Show items in child feeds" is active and my favorite way of browsing the feeds)

LolZ said...

Yes, 115, can't tell: everything is really fast ("Show items in child feeds" is off).

Anonymous said...

No, 35, dunno.

I restart liferea every few hours to keep feed loading down, otherwise it gets unresponsive. It's especially bad when you use the "show items of all child feeds when a folder is selected" preference, which I rely on.

Shin Dig said...

no, ~100, reading new messages is gets quite slow.

Interesting timing on this post though, as I just posted something to my blog this morning about speeding up Liferea by doing an sqlite vacuum on the db. I'd suggest doing that on liferea startup, as it will help keep performance from degrading over the long haul.

Anonymous said...

1. No, very slow
2. 200
3. 1200s, updating feeds

jollyr0ger said...

1- no, too slow
2- about 200
3- 10s expanding a folder with 20 feed

Patrick said...

1) Yes
2) 25
3) No serious issues. Have had trouble with loading feeds with long histories, but most of my performance problems are due to swapping out. I tend to leave liferea running for days or weeks and never restart it specifically to free memory or speed up.

Fabian said...

1) Updating feeds is too slow. Mainly because Liferea doesn't seem to fetch several feeds at once (anymore?).

I don't search feeds.

2) A bit more than 130.

3) Viewing (or scrolling past) articles that contain multi-byte characters can take several seconds.

hex said...

no, 139, ~10s switching to "unread", sometimes about 5s after pressing ctrl+n

John M Lang said...

1. No

2. ~100

3. sometimes as long as 30s when selecting a feed.

whycode said...

No, 10, Feed update is slow sometimes.

3dx said...

1. NO
2. 180
3.60s -->>Updating all feeds

Anonymous said...

1) no
see :
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/liferea/+bug/203157/
http://liferea.blogspot.com/2008/07/serious-problems-with-xulrunner-19.html

2) 86
3) up to 20-30 seconds when clicking on "flagged" or "unread" or any folder (show the items of all child feeds when a folder is selected is on)

Jonathan said...

1. Yes
2. 45 feeds
3. I mostly use the "Next Unread Item" feature, and it's a bit slow to switch from one feed to another. Within a feed, it's Ok.

And I experience the xulrunner-1.9 problem too (it seems to be this one : http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=487927 )

However, I find Liferea to be quite useful, thanks for it.

chmac said...

Usually
Maybe a hundred or so, not sure where to get that info
When I click Flagged Posts I sometimes wait a few seconds, not more than 3 or 4 though

Great software. :)

Ash said...

1. No not really
2. 86
3. 10 seconds just now clicking from the "combined view" Facebook notifications feed to the "All Unread" search folder with 3 items in it. It's a little frustrating, because it does this kind of thing often on my relatively modern processor.

It also takes a really long time to start up.

Anonymous said...

Liferea is responsive enough post-install, and is for some time, but after a month or so it becomes unbearably slow. I can fix this, however, by deleting the "liferea.db" file (when it gets as large as 15 MB, liferea is unusable in my computer). Maybe there should be a function to purge this file monthly, or something.

Aubrey Island said...

No, I get frequent crashes. I use the view child feeds using folder, best way to browse.

Daryll said...

1. No
2. 75
3. 30s hitting space to go to the next unread

Pete said...

1: Just doesn't feel 'snappy' enough, and search feels quite sluggish. Happens more when entering new folders.

2: About 100 or so subscriptions, currently 7976 unread msg's.

3: 2 or so seconds when clicking on a new folder, other times its less than a second, but enough to make it feel sluggish.

Thanks for all the hard work, would definitely love a much snappier Liferea, those pauses, even minute, really detract from the experience at times.

Anonymous said...

Veery slow starting up, about 15sec. (Ubuntu 9.04 running on ├╝ber-hardware. :p)

Uses a hell lot of disk I/O upon update/startup, havent tried disabling caching, but I will certainly try another feed-reader too see if its more snappy. : )

Anonymous said...

Maybe's too late to participate, but this launchpad bug report sheds some light on how to fix Liferea's slowness. I have to wait for about 5-8 seconds for changing a feed or reading the first item of each feed. The system monitor applet shows 100% disk activity, and the bug reporter did a strace and found loads of fsyncs.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/liferea/+bug/290666

Anonymous said...

I very much like Liferea and it's improved stability, I just wish it was as responsive as, say Mozilla's Thunderbird.

Anonymous said...

no, 30-50, 30s-60s. just about.

Anonymous said...

(1) Definitely not, rather the opposite. It's frustratingly slow.
(2) Well over 1000 subscriptions in many (~50) folders
(3) Marking any folder read with more than, say 100, unread items takes literally minutes. Also, updating feeds makes Liferea unresponsive for half an hour or so, meaning you can't really navigate existing feeds while it's updating.

Anonymous said...

I know this is old blog post, but I got here while searching for a solution for very slow Lifrea.

It loads slow even with default feeds. Both stable 1.6.2 and (now installed) 1.7.4 unstable work pretty poor.

debug output, among other things says this:
"PERF: function "startup" is slow! Took 23371ms."

Don't know why it works like that, I'll be searching some more, it must be already known problem..

foresto said...

1. No. Clicking on a feed or folder often leaves Liferea unresponsive for 5-20 seconds before it shows the new headline list.

2. I have about 30 feed subscriptions. My biggest folder has about 20 feeds in it.

3. The most annoying periods of unresponsiveness occur when I click a headline. The html appears quickly, but when I try to scroll down to the text I'm interested in, scrolling is often halted while additional comments and/or images are loaded. It is maddening to know that the information I want is available but liferea won't let me see it. It often takes 5+ seconds until I can finally scroll again.

Secondly, see #1, above. Clicking a feed folder locks up the whole UI for way too long, even after I have vacuumed the sqlite database.