5291 vs. DeleteBrokenTables

From: Robert Wilhelm (robert.wilhelm@gmx.net)
Date: Thu Oct 02 2003 - 18:00:29 EDT

  • Next message: Dom Lachowicz: "Commit: some clipboard imp/exp work"

    On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 15:31, msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:

    >
    > 2. Try profiling the layout fill phase to see if there is anything in
    > particular that is a bottleneck. We're currently using the GTK table
    > layout algorithim which is extremely robust but might be the cause of the
    > slow fill time in the those huge tables.

    About half of the layout fill phase is spent in
    fpTableContainer::deleteBrokenTables. This recursive function
    is invoked about 65M times :-(

    In fp_VerticalContainer::bumpContainers there is an interesting
    comment:
    //
    // Experimental code: FIXME: Might remove after a while - check
    // that large tables broken over many pages work fine.
    //
    #if 1
    [...] deleteBrokenTables [...]
    #endif

    Maybe Martin can elaborate a bit on this issue.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Oct 02 2003 - 18:23:05 EDT