Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 3.x

[laurencec]

Hi

I just upgraded from lightroom 2.7 to lightroom 3. I then proceeded to import my old catalog. this all went fine but lightroom is so slow, the thumbnail previews take forever to load if I manage to have the patience to wait  for them.

is there a quick solution?? How can it be sped up?

thanks

Laurence

Message title was edited by: Brett N

[Guest]

Dan

I am on the happy side, because LR 3 works generally fine on my machine (only occasionally some temporary hickups). I appreciate your intense conversation with the rest of us on this issue, it is more than happens with other product vendors.

Although I am not affected (yet?), I am curious, if you have already any indication of why some users are affected by the slowdowns, others (like me) apparently not. Have I not used Lightroom 3 heavily enough ?

Kind regards

Thomas

[teho59]

LR is not so annoying now that I know some bugs has been fixed and we can expect a fix in near future. (Hope thay cure my problems)

I am very pleased you gave us info Dan, but personally I think a kind of status should have been sent out earlier.

- Terje

[DanTull]

Well, the fix was just checked in yesterday (and prior to yesterday morning, the bug hadn't been fully verified) and I didn't personally verify it until just now. It looks like the memory is reined in now, but I'll need to follow up on the "turbo" loupe speed, which appears to still be off from 2.7 even with memory under control (turbo loupe refers to a special mode used when the arrow key is held down to favor speed over preview quality).

My pledge to you and everybody on this forum: I will tell you absolutely as much as I can get away with telling you as soon as possible. For example, there's one more detail on this bug that I can't tell you yet. I'll post on that later. Promise.

DT

[teho59]

Thanks!

- Terje

[Jasonized-nfnCsn]

Thanks Dan!

  I for one, think it's great that you _can_ respond.  Just knowing that someone has seen our problem, and is working on it (or it has been assigned to someone) is about all we can realistically hope for.  Well, we *can* hope that it gets fixed, but we all know how companies are about that.

So, thank you for your responses, and insight into how the work is going!

As for the people who say that they can not live without x-feature/speed/etc: well, sure... if I had an option to "downgrade" my catalog (or hadn't been stupid enough to do a lot of work before I fully tested the build), I would have gone back to 2.7 as well.  But I didn't and I can't.  At least I've learned my lesson (again).

Ciao!

[DanTull]

My pledge to you and everybody on this forum: I will tell you absolutely as much as I can get away with telling you as soon as possible. For example, there's one more detail on [the memory accumulation in Library loupe bug] that I can't tell you yet. I'll post on that later. Promise.

As some are discovering in using the 3.2 beta the "other detail" about the bug that I couldn't say at the time was that it just barely missed the time limit for the RC drop. I was majorly bummed by the timing since I knew it was a really important bug and I was really keen to get feedback on whether the fix had any unwanted side effects that we missed, but there were enough other things fixed and it was already overdue to get some kind of update out.

Anyway, I said I promised to come back and share that detail and there it is. Here's hoping that means the 3.2 final version will give another boost to those having significant performance pain in 3.0 -- we shall see.

DT

[Jasonized-nfnCsn]

Hey Dan,

   Thanks for the update!  We apprecate it...

But I have to ask you... how big *is* the image cache in 3.2rc?  I just ran out of 16gig of ram after editing (creating a new collection) from a couple of thousand images...

Seems a bit memory hungry...  :}

Cheers!

[DanTull]

how big *is* the image cache in 3.2rc? 

This one wasn't a cache sizing issue exactly. It was a case where previews were not being accounted for properly -- they were treated as having a much smaller size than their actual size, so LR holds on to way more of them than it should.

DT

[areohbee]

Jasonized wrote:

I just ran out of 16gig of ram after editing...

Seems a bit memory hungry...  :}

memory hungry

memory leak bug

[teho59]

Hi Dan,

This important error missed the "time limit", why does a time limit exists at all?

When do the next fix come out?

If it is fixed next week, get it out!

I have worked in software business for many years. If an error exists that causes big problems, get is fixed and sent out as soon as possible. Not when you have fixed enough errors or on a specific bugfix-release date. I think you should reconsider your politics on that one.

Not angry but a bit annoyed if we have to wait another couple of months to get a fix.

- Terje

[DanTull]

Not angry but a bit annoyed if we have to wait another couple of months to get a fix.

Without tipping my hand to far, you'll note the 3.2 release is marked as RC, so (without being specific) so you might guess that it won't be nearly as long until 3.2 final (which will have the applicable fix) as it was from 3.0 to 3.2, though I'm still bummed that it didn't make the cut and thus missed the opportunity to get broader testing before 3.2 final is out.

As for the timing/release time, there were many important bugs fixed in the RC. I would have been pretty darned tempted to hold it just a little longer to include this fix, but that decision is above my pay grade.

You'll actually note that 3.2 has a few other features in it. It isn't strictly speaking just a bugfix release and definitely isn't of the "emergency bugfix get it out ASAP variety" much to the chagrin of the folks most severely impacted by some of the bugs.

DT

[ChBr02]

I'm sure this is a totally stupid question, but what happened to LR3.1? Being superstitious, I only like the odd number releases. Having been at Hughes during the Surveyor Project, we noticed that for the most part, only the odd launches were successful. At some point, I guess it was a self-fulfilling prophesy. We got to where we didn't expect the even number launches to work.

ChBr02

[Lee_Jay-ZyZk56]

3.1 was skipped to get back into sync with the Camera Raw release numbering (3.2=6.2).

[john Nall]

Dan, I'm one of the participants in this string that's having speed problems with LR3 (brush tool almost useless, various intermittent problems).  Do you recommend I load 3.2 now, or wait until additional fixes are incorporated?

Thanks, John

[areohbee]

I recommend trying Lr3.2RC - it might fix some of your problems.

Some of these problems are just due to "a single bit out of place" - maybe Lr3.2RC will jostle your bits...

In 99% of cases Lr3.2RC will be a net improvement over 3.0. Backup your previous installation if you need a bridge back, but then go for it!

PS - I'm just a fellow lightroom / forum user - no affiliation with Adobe, no inside knowlege...

Rob

[john Nall]

Rob, I don't know if your response was to my question, but I'll assume it is, and install 3.2 to give it a try.  Appreciate your feedback.

John

[teho59]

DanTull wrote:

Not angry but a bit annoyed if we have to wait another couple of months to get a fix.

Without tipping my hand to far, you'll note the 3.2 release is marked as RC, so (without being specific) so you might guess that it won't be nearly as long until 3.2 final (which will have the applicable fix) as it was from 3.0 to 3.2, though I'm still bummed that it didn't make the cut and thus missed the opportunity to get broader testing before 3.2 final is out.

As for the timing/release time, there were many important bugs fixed in the RC. I would have been pretty darned tempted to hold it just a little longer to include this fix, but that decision is above my pay grade.

You'll actually note that 3.2 has a few other features in it. It isn't strictly speaking just a bugfix release and definitely isn't of the "emergency bugfix get it out ASAP variety" much to the chagrin of the folks most severely impacted by some of the bugs.

DT

Thanks for the clearification!

I am impacted by slowness so I want it as fast as possible of course

- Terje

[areohbee]

DanTull wrote:

Without tipping my hand too far...

Thanks for being as forthcoming as possible...

DanTull wrote:

there were many important bugs fixed in the RC.

I'm noticing, and I must say its a huge relief for me - thank you, thank you, thank you - pass it on...

Rob

[TK2142]

DanTull wrote:

As some are discovering in using the 3.2 beta the "other detail" about the bug that I couldn't say at the time was that it just barely missed the time limit for the RC drop.

Dan, there are some other bugs that couldn't be fixed in time for LR3.2 RC.

Are you following the "Lightroom 3.2 Release Candidate Available on Adobe Labs" (http://forums.adobe.com/message/3050206) thread at all?

Hopefully the information exchanged there is useful for the team. I personally don't primarily provide my observations for other users but in the hope that someone from the team is monitoring that thread.

Is it useful to continue contributing technical details to that thread or are official bug reports the way to go?

[Jasonized-nfnCsn]

but the most glaring place that one would show up was during sustained rapid advances through Library loupe on a large monitor.

Ah, yes, that would do it.  I think I forgot to mention that I run dual 24" Eizo monitors...   So that does sound like a fix I desperately need!

I'm sure we all understand that 3.1 may be awhile (when it comes, it comes).. but *surely* you need alpha testers for 3.0.1?  Hmmm???  Just to make sure you found the right bug, right? 

Cheers!

[john Nall]

Dan,

Add to your list this, just seen:  while using the brush to selectively change color saturation (with "show selected mask overlay" checked), a) selected areas would suddenly disappear, and b) the red overlay would at first look like a square of some size, and then settle in to the shape I just drew.

Maybe LR3 is haunted?

[camerahans]

red square and disappearing mask I see here too when working with saturation.

[camerahans]

ok, I experience the same problem here.

[GaryRowe-gcvt07]

If you are on Windows and want to know what's happening on your system *in detail*, then I recommend the SysInternals Suite from Mark Russinovitch - download at

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb842062.aspx

My favourites are:

Process Explorer gives a great view of what process is doing what (and you can monitor LOTS on a per-process basis)

Process Monitor gives you every single thing happening on your system - it's scary! Learn how to exclude * filter stuff to be able to see the details you are interested in ...

RamMap lets you see overall and process memory usage, and I could see LR3 could take up to almost 3GB of my system's 4GB when I was going through my images in Loupe view  (and in the Files tab I could see the .tmp file that was discussed a few posts ago, taking up all that memory)

I've used these tools to solve many a strange issue in Windows systems over the years (and the tools keep getting better and better!)

Have fun,

Gary

[areohbee]

Thanks Gary,

Running those utils makes me realize how little I really know about modern computer internals these days.

ProcMon in particular does show what a busy bee Lightroom is - even when "nothing" is happening...

Rob