[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#774399: libreoffice: aggressive (blocking) config rewrite (lag, slowness)



Hi,

On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 11:50:42AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> With /home on network file system (NFS or similar) libreoffice is lagging 
> miserably on basic operations like when libreoffice just started or new writer 
> document is opened etc., as well as on innocent moves between tabs under 
> [Tools -> Options -> Libreoffice] even when nothing is changed.
> 
> Strace-ing revealed the problem which is aggressive re-write of 
> "registrymodifications.xcu" in "~/.config/libreoffice/4/user":
> on almost every action in libreoffice a new temporary file is created (in user 
> profile folder) and renamed to "registrymodifications.xcu". The latter is 
> about 1 MiB and about that much data is written very very often. But the worst 
That file basically contains many of your personal data:
That's what I have here in my file.
 - personal data (as entered in the options)
 - also contains the last opened files (and thumbnails of them.)
   So of course it's updated on a document open.
 - it also contains the (scanned on start) list of available system-wide
   dictionaries
 - state of the windows/toolbars

> thing about it is that configuration is not written in background -- instead 
> it is a blocking operation causing very uncomfortable lag in user interface.

But that indeed is bad.

> Also it seems that often configuration file is unnecessary (re-)written when 
> nothing has changed.

Except maybe some window states...

> [...] But the worst 
> thing about it is that configuration is not written in background -- instead
> it is a blocking operation causing very uncomfortable lag in user interface.
>
> Also it seems that often configuration file is unnecessary (re-)written when
> nothing has changed.
>
> What can be done to minimise rewrites of "registrymodifications.xcu" or reduce 
> frequency of configuration save?

Will ask upstream.

Regards,

Rene


Reply to: