Created attachment 128196 [details] example file with 50x100 cells I'm using Libreoffice 5.0.6.2 Build-ID 1:5.0.6-0ubuntu1 on Ubuntu Linux 15.10. I have a file with 50x100 cells and every cell has a small picture in it. Opening this file takes about 9 minutes and top tells me that the process only uses one of my 8 processors (or cores). My computer has a intel core i7 3770k which is a little bit overclocked to run at 4.2 ghz. In my opinion this behaviour is completely unacceptable, espacially that libreoffice only uses one core which leads me to the conclusion that there is no real multithreading implemented. But i haven't investigated this that much to say anything more profound about it.
5.0 branch is EOL. Please give a try to last stable LO version 5.2.2 (I think you may find it on LO ppa).
(In reply to Christian from comment #0) > Created attachment 128196 [details] > example file with 50x100 cells > > I'm using Libreoffice 5.0.6.2 Build-ID 1:5.0.6-0ubuntu1 on Ubuntu Linux > 15.10. I confirm this on daily20161020. Thanks for filing - interesting document and test! > In my opinion this behaviour is completely unacceptable, espacially that > libreoffice only uses one core which leads me to the conclusion that there > is no real multithreading implemented. But i haven't investigated this that > much to say anything more profound about it. Yes, do that first :)
@christian: how did you make that file, or any idea of the origin of it? Anyway: same problem in 3.3.0
@Cor Nouws: maybe I have some spare time to try debugging a little bit deeper but normally thats not my daily business. I created the file by myself simply by copy&pasting it in all the cells I needed. The creation was also really slow but at the time of creation it wasn't something special for me. I was astonished as I had to open the file again half an hour later and it took me longer then the creation. @Julien Nabet: I will update my computer to the newest Ubuntu release tonight but as Cor Nouws already confirmed it seems to be a really old bug.
@Christian (In reply to Christian from comment #4) > I created the file by myself simply by copy&pasting it in all the cells I > needed. The creation was also really slow but at the time of creation it OK, thanks. It's just to know that it's not from some 'strange' application that created it. > @Julien Nabet: I will update my computer to the newest Ubuntu release > tonight but as Cor Nouws already confirmed it seems to be a really old bug. And still present in recent dailys. The bug is new and marked as perf, so up to the devs (or maybe you?) to see where in the code the time is spent.. Ciao
Just watched some minutes of multithread cpu usage via ps, here just 10 seconds, it looks the same the whole time till the file is completely loaded: PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.6 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.6 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.6 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.6 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.6 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.6 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.6 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.7 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.7 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0 PID TID PSR %CPU 5033 5033 6 99.7 5033 5035 1 0.0 5033 5037 5 0.0 5033 5038 1 0.0 5033 5039 7 0.0 5033 5040 7 0.0 5033 5041 7 0.0
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
Bug is still present in LibreOffice 5.4.2 from the website
Bug got fixed, tested Version is 6.1.3-1
Thanks for retesting with the latest version. Setting to RESOLVED WORKSFORME as the commit fixing this issue hasn't been identified.