Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 115

Thread: The First Benchmarks Of Unity On XMir: There's A Performance Hit

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOne View Post
    Pretty true, people is exaggerating things up. As some one else said FPS means frames per second, so a 1 second lag means 1 frame per second.
    First, I must say I didn't watch whatever video you are meaning, so I don't get misunderstood.
    However, in a post which was deleted (because it was an answer to some troll), I explained something. In the post where it's stated there is one second lag, first it explicitly said *at times*. Also, when you talk about lag you don't imply it's at all the time, because then it's just a low general performance.
    There might be a one second lag (and I say might because I didn't watch the video, i.e. I don't know if there is) and not be reflected by the benchmark, which makes a statistic of a given runtime. It measures some statistically relevant data which doesn't seem to include the range of obtained FPS. If I read it correctly, it only measures median, average and standard deviation, while lag is in most cases an outlier, something that happens during a short amount of time. If this is the case, this generally high performance (I think considering it's running on a compatibility layer, 10-15% loss is not really a bad performance, it's just bad because of the fact it's unneeded) might actually seem lower to the benchmark because of this short periods of extremely low performance. Furthermore, this seemingly bad news for XMir might be better than they look, because this probably points the issue to be a single bottleneck or bug, instead of being something more spread around in the code.

    I understand that running a desktop environment on top of xmir/xwayland is just a waste of resources, but I still don't understand the technical details behind saying that running just applications under xwayland/xmir will result in faster rendering for X applications than running them in X directly.

    Anyway it seems that canonical gave a shot at running a full DE to keep the development adrenaline going on or shut the people at kubuntu saying that ubuntu and kubuntu flavors would not be able to co-exists due to mir.
    Well, don't take what I say as a sure thing, because I lack a lot of knowledge in this area, and I don't know how the current implementation is done, so I will just say how I think it might be better.
    First, we should assume that either Wayland or Mir (whichever we care about) is faster than X.org, at the very least on compositing.
    Then, we can think the virtual server will only activate compositing if there is an app calling the extension, which will be probably a window manager. If not, all the compositing will be managed by the system compositor or whatever it's called on Mir, which is more efficient than X. This X will not need to actually handle most of the input either, since inside the surface, where the rootless X server is running, you have all the input and all the (virtual) screen on your app. This means you can safely ignore, if no WM is loaded inside this (which might probably be figured out in several ways, where one valid for compositing window managers might be the loading or not of compositing extension), all of the input grab and release requests. For all that X.org cares about, this windows is the only thing that will handle any input. Since compositing is off, the only thing the X server will care about in terms of output will be what the client window wants to draw. And I guess there are several other parts which could be easily ignored with this assumption of a single, fullscreen app for X11. It's like taking shortcuts, mostly.

    EDIT: I forgot to say, the other thing about running on top of a compatibility layer is that, as any code, might introduce bugs. It's usually a trade-off for a potential benefit (in the case of using XMir/Wayland in a native Mir/Wayland system, the obvious benefit is that you are able to run software that has not been ported), but in this case there is no benefit, and it makes it harder to maintain. If XMir or XWayland introduces new bugs on KWin, they will not fix them, which makes sense because even reproducing them takes a lot of work if they don't use that solution, and it's very distro specific (at least at the moment; KWin runs natively on Wayland, so there's REALLY no point on trying that configuration, aside for love for science, and Mir is currently Ubuntu only). Kubuntu maintainer says he (and that flavor's community) lacks the know-how and the manpower to fix bugs in KWin, so they can't fix what doesn't correspond to upstream. This means that chances are there will be no one to fix XMir/KWin combination bugs, except Canonical pays someone to. And also, this patches wouldn't be accepted upstream, because of several reasons, one of which is that new code is always likely to introduce new bugs. However, this might be the only viable option: using other solution would mean having multiple duplicated libs (at the very least, the toolkits), which would have to be maintained and tested, too.
    Also, at some point is likely X.org versions get dropped from upstream, tho I wouldn't expect that to happen in the next two or three years, and this means this solution will be ineffective, or Kubuntu will have to bring outdated versions.
    Last edited by mrugiero; 06-28-2013 at 10:11 PM.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intellivision View Post
    It sounds like you have more of an issue with copyright assignment than the license itself.
    While I admit CA isn't the best solution, it does assist a project to change licenses if they feel the desire to.
    For instance, VLC had to remove code from libvlc since they wanted to relicense it as LGPL, but they couldn't contact a contributor who's code was under the GPL.
    They eventually changed the license, but the process took months to do. And some projects are so large, such as Linux and Wordpress, that even if desired the license cannot be changed.
    And Canonical isn't the only organisation that does this. OwnCloud, Cunity, Diaspora*, Apache and software from the FSF all require CA's or your contribution has to be under a permissive license such as MIT for specifically the issue of license changes.
    And I'm sure that with CA you don't relinquish your rights over your code, you just give a copy of your rights to someone else.
    To use a proprietary Mir as an example, there would be nothing stopping you from banding together with the other Mir developers, pooling your code together and creating a FOSS competitor.
    Well, if the problem is license changes, you could just use MIT. I don't think anyone has any problem with that, or else they wouldn't support Wayland or X.org either. Rather, the problem is that Canonical can relicense without consulting anyone (again, this doesn't keep the GPL version from staying there, and in fact they must keep a GPL version of any code that was contributed under the CLA), and everyone else can not (except, as you said, they form this pool, but it's hard to contact all contributors, let alone all agreeing on the same thing at the same time, and in fact it wouldn't be "without consulting anyone"), because it's GPL and it doesn't allow relicensing. The only possible disadvantage I see is it's far from giving equal rights to all of the stakeholders, but I really see nothing that hurts the community on this, since what the community gets benefited the most is not from the right to make closed source derivatives but from open source contributions.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    112

    Default

    I've been quite surprised reading this and the other 2 Mir threads in the last couple of days. Either Canonical's bull works and people think the whole making XMir default is actually a sign of progress or BOSS has created 3-4 more accounts to do his regular work while his main account tests the limits of absurdity.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    So in order to make sure they get it right we will probably have Wayland ready somewhere around 2050. Or 2100 to get it REAALLY right.



    One word: Freedom. They can do it. They can fork the entire linux kernel and create their own OS and create the greatest marketing campaign on Earth and sell it and become more successful than all the distros combined.



    It's been 95% done for a couple of years now. That Weston genius from what I heard had trouble with the minimize button. As in they didn't have it. Brilliant reference implementation. Everything in Wayland is a sad joke and free software hipsters won't see it because they think Canonical == Evil while Wayland == Good. Mir is already the future. And it's already here. Wake up people!

    One word: freedom. Because they can. They can fork the whole kernel and create their own modified version and then create the coolest marketing campaign on Earth and wipe the floor with all the other distros.

    Great post , agreed with most of it...

  5. #105
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee. View Post
    So, even Unity will lose performance when running on XMir vs. running on straight Xorg - and Mir was built for Unity. Why should any other distro use XMir again?

    (also, it's cute how the fanbois are already making excuses... "it's still early days!" "it's not that bad a hit, only 10%!" well, when that 10% hit brings no additional benefit, what reason is there to take that hit...)
    Uh, you do realize that's a valid excuse, right? When software is in alpha, the most important thing is making it work. Making it work fast comes afterwards. I've seen it happen with a bunch of projects (open source graphics drivers, webM, webGL...)

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOne View Post
    Pretty true, people is exaggerating things up. As some one else said FPS means frames per second, so a 1 second lag means 1 frame per second.[/url]
    No, that's not what it means. Lag in this context most probably means the amount of time it takes for the image to show up on the screen after it's been rendered.

    You could, for example, have 10,000 FPS in glxgears and still have it display on your screen a second late. That's what it means.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intellivision View Post
    It sounds like you have more of an issue with copyright assignment than the license itself.
    I don't. My post wasn't pro or against Mir, just about licenses and copyright.
    I'm personally fine with any project having any license it wishes, it's not like anyone forces anybody to contribute.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meklu View Post
    No, that's not what it means. Lag in this context most probably means the amount of time it takes for the image to show up on the screen after it's been rendered.

    You could, for example, have 10,000 FPS in glxgears and still have it display on your screen a second late. That's what it means.
    True, it is a term used widely on the gaming world to indicate that network data transportation/latency is out of sync or behind what it should be.

    On this case we are talking about graphical lag, how can you notice the underlying system is lagging or behind by 1 second without a tool to measure it? Which part on the video showing XMir running the desktop environments we see the mouse pointer or some other component stop responding for 1 second?

    In any case here is the video which some guys are saying has a 1 second lag (also some one else said 30% fps drop means 1 second lag).
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8h0m-ZjPxe8

    On a side note: maybe the guy that said he saw 1 second lag didn't noticed that what lagged was his flash player
    Last edited by TheOne; 06-29-2013 at 09:15 AM.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darxus View Post
    spacetoilet, mrugiero, dee., please don't feed the troll. Just click the Report Post "!" link at the bottom left of the post. Relevant posts deleted.
    A bit off-topic, but it really bothers me how Michael stopped maintaining custom user titles. You don't have any, other important people don't have any, some have wrong or outdated titles, etc. It makes it hard to know who is who.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOne View Post
    True, it is a term used widely on the gaming world to indicate that network data transportation/latency is out of sync or behind what it should be.

    On this case we are talking about graphical lag, how can you notice the underlying system is lagging or behind by 1 second without a tool to measure it? Which part on the video showing XMir running the desktop environments we see the mouse pointer or some other component stop responding for 1 second?

    In any case here is the video which some guys are saying has a 1 second lag (also some one else said 30% fps drop means 1 second lag).
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8h0m-ZjPxe8

    On a side note: maybe the guy that said he saw 1 second lag didn't noticed that what lagged was his flash player
    I just noticed something that might come as a lag if you assume a mouse gesture is used. When blender is opened in Unity and it zooms in and out, one second before that happens the pointer goes down. I think whoever said there was lag assumed that the pointer going down was a mouse gesture to zoom in, while it's probably done with the scroll wheel, and such order might have been given after the pointer went down.
    Otherwise, I have no idea how can he know of any lag, since he doesn't see when the input is done.

    Quote Originally Posted by DaVince View Post
    Uh, you do realize that's a valid excuse, right? When software is in alpha, the most important thing is making it work. Making it work fast comes afterwards. I've seen it happen with a bunch of projects (open source graphics drivers, webM, webGL...)
    Even when you are right about it, and .dee is wrong in his statement that "it's designed for Unity" (is true for Mir, but it's running on XMir, and X wasn't designed with Unity in mind), they better take it out of alpha fast, since they expect it to be in production use (which means it need to go through beta and realease candidates) in 13.10. Also, is not a valid excuse to run a desktop on XMir. Mir might have benefits. XMir have them for particular apps. XMir doesn't provide none of those when running all of your desktop on it. And as all software, it's bug surface, and you are making that bigger by putting an unneeded, non-feature providing, extra layer.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •