Hi,
MM on my PC (AMD K6 400 MHz) needs 21 seconds for displaying about 2500 titles while cpu-usage is at 100%. Why is MM so slow?
Roland
poor performance
Moderator: Gurus
Slow view refresh in MM 2.0
MM will often carry out multiple tasks at the same time. E.g. it may scan your collection at the same time as the view is being refreshed, in which case it'll take more time.
That said, there are performance enhancements in MM 2.1 that significantly speed up view refreshes. You can download it from the beta forum at:
http://www.songs-db.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=6
That said, there are performance enhancements in MM 2.1 that significantly speed up view refreshes. You can download it from the beta forum at:
http://www.songs-db.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=6
-
Roland
MM isn't as compact as e.g. WinAmp 2, it has some requirements for the hardware, but it is quite logical given its rich feature set.
As for displaying tracks - it takes longer than in many other players because track information isn't stored in memory, but in database, which has some disadvantages (showing of all tracks in the library takes a couple of seconds - depending on the HW), but also has a number of advantages, e.g. the database can be shared among computers.
As for cpu usage for playback - as long as no other feature is enabled (equalizer, volume levelling, ...) the requirements should be pretty much the same as in WinAmp, because the playback engine works in a similar way.
Jiri
As for displaying tracks - it takes longer than in many other players because track information isn't stored in memory, but in database, which has some disadvantages (showing of all tracks in the library takes a couple of seconds - depending on the HW), but also has a number of advantages, e.g. the database can be shared among computers.
As for cpu usage for playback - as long as no other feature is enabled (equalizer, volume levelling, ...) the requirements should be pretty much the same as in WinAmp, because the playback engine works in a similar way.
Jiri
-
Roland
So now, i tested V2.1 and now displaying 2500 titles takes 4 seconds more!?!
I know the difference between displaying tracks via memory or via database cause i'm an Accessprogrammer.
Is it possible to use a MySQL Database instead of the access-db? Of course, there is no problem to change this by myself, but is MM capable of it?
Roland
I know the difference between displaying tracks via memory or via database cause i'm an Accessprogrammer.
Is it possible to use a MySQL Database instead of the access-db? Of course, there is no problem to change this by myself, but is MM capable of it?
Roland
There shouldn't be any speed decrese between these two version and also I wasn't able to measure any. Have you used the same library content to show?
Generally other SQL servers would be possible to use, however some minor modifications would be necessary, it could come in some later version. However, I don't think it would increase DB communication speed, because it is mainly limited by ODBC.
Jiri
Generally other SQL servers would be possible to use, however some minor modifications would be necessary, it could come in some later version. However, I don't think it would increase DB communication speed, because it is mainly limited by ODBC.
Jiri
Maybe
I'm not sure but might the 'Update Library' increase the speed???
Download MediaMonkey | License
Help: Knowledge Base | MediaMonkey for Windows 5 | MediaMonkey for Android
Lowlander (MediaMonkey user since 2003)
Help: Knowledge Base | MediaMonkey for Windows 5 | MediaMonkey for Android
Lowlander (MediaMonkey user since 2003)
-
rovingcowboy
- Posts: 14163
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:57 am
- Location: (Texas)
- Contact:
i have never seen what your system is? roland?
but if your an access programer i am guessing it is winxp.
if you have win xp or it might work on win 2000 but i have not had luck in win98 or win me with these plugins for this tweaking prgram.
but in the program called "Xteq- setup 6" there is a plug in that will allow you to add a context menu on the right click in which you can start any exe in real time or the plug in will allow you to set it to run all programs that are in front to run in real time.. and there is also a skd for the xteq set up tweek so you being a programer can write your own plugins for it to use.
this might help. if the 21 or 25 seconds is really bothering you as it would if your a perfectionilst
but i dont have that trouble on this fast 2.35 ghz pent 4.
but then again i also have just increased the swap file on my win98 and it is running faster now also. maybe you need to increase your swap file?
i am not a programer just trying to help with what i find out.
but if your an access programer i am guessing it is winxp.
if you have win xp or it might work on win 2000 but i have not had luck in win98 or win me with these plugins for this tweaking prgram.
but in the program called "Xteq- setup 6" there is a plug in that will allow you to add a context menu on the right click in which you can start any exe in real time or the plug in will allow you to set it to run all programs that are in front to run in real time.. and there is also a skd for the xteq set up tweek so you being a programer can write your own plugins for it to use.
this might help. if the 21 or 25 seconds is really bothering you as it would if your a perfectionilst
but i dont have that trouble on this fast 2.35 ghz pent 4.
but then again i also have just increased the swap file on my win98 and it is running faster now also. maybe you need to increase your swap file?
i am not a programer just trying to help with what i find out.
roving cowboy / keith hall. My skins http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... =9&t=16724 for some help check on Monkey's helpful messages at http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... 4008#44008 MY SYSTEMS.1.Jukebox WinXp pro sp 3 version 3.5 gigabyte mb. 281 GHz amd athlon x2 240 built by me.) 2.WinXP pro sp3, vers 2.5.5 and vers 3.5 backup storage, shuttle 32a mb,734 MHz amd athlon put together by me.) 3.Dell demension, winxp pro sp3, mm3.5 spare jukebox.) 4.WinXp pro sp3, vers 3.5, dad's computer bought from computer store. )5. Samsung Galaxy A51 5G Android ) 6. amd a8-5600 apu 3.60ghz mm version 4 windows 7 pro bought from computer store.
-
Roland
@rovingcowboy
My system on 400 MHz PC is Windows NT 4.0, on 600 MHz Celeron resides Windows 98 SE. Off course, not really up to date but it works for me. Increasing the swap file doesn't make sense, because the physical memory isn't nearly completely occupied.
@Jiri:
Yes, I used the same library content. In the meantime I tested MM using the same recordsets uploaded to MySQL Server. This configuration extend displaying time over 1 min.
I did another test on an P4 2 GHz and there it takes only 3 seconds.
So, I think the problem is the databaseengine used for reading the access-db. A quick look at the exe-file indicates borland programming (Delphi I think) and maybe BDE is used.
A really convenient suprise is searching speed, it only takes seconds (on my old PC) to find fragments, which normally cannot be found via index.
BTW: I tested so much MP3-Management Software and MM is the only one, that convinced me ... except that performance problem.
My system on 400 MHz PC is Windows NT 4.0, on 600 MHz Celeron resides Windows 98 SE. Off course, not really up to date but it works for me. Increasing the swap file doesn't make sense, because the physical memory isn't nearly completely occupied.
@Jiri:
Yes, I used the same library content. In the meantime I tested MM using the same recordsets uploaded to MySQL Server. This configuration extend displaying time over 1 min.
I did another test on an P4 2 GHz and there it takes only 3 seconds.
So, I think the problem is the databaseengine used for reading the access-db. A quick look at the exe-file indicates borland programming (Delphi I think) and maybe BDE is used.A really convenient suprise is searching speed, it only takes seconds (on my old PC) to find fragments, which normally cannot be found via index.
BTW: I tested so much MP3-Management Software and MM is the only one, that convinced me ... except that performance problem.