Hello Rene.
The technical reason to introduce the TTF fonts and the special package
on Windows platforms is not clear.
The total size of the ROOT distribution for Windows is
15Mb. With version 3.05 ones has to download 2.5 Mb extra TTF files with
just to slowdown his/her application.
Windows always was working with TTF fonts with no extra software
involved,
It is standard way to manage fonts on Windows.
The existent WIN32 implementation of TVirtualX methods does provide
almost all functions one needs to manage the TTF fonts those are part of
any Windows OS.
Qt edition of TVirtualX doesn't require any separate TTF fonts either.
Very likely it is a price one has to prepare to pay to use the free
"win32gdk" version
Valeri
>
> I cannot reproduce this problem with $ROOTSYS/test/hsimple.cxx.
>
> The main difference between 3.04 and 3.05 is the introduction by
default
> of the True Type Fonts. If you run the benchmarks.C with 3.04 without
> using TTF and 3.05 with TTF, you may see a factor 2 on graphics
> applications. If you use the new 3.05/05, you can disable TTF in
> system.rootrc.
> We will work on the speed improvements with TTF.
>
> Rene Brun
>
> Andrzej Kupsc wrote:
> >
> > Hej,
> >
> > We have found that some of our root based applications seems to
run
> > 2-4 times slower with root_v3.05.04 as compared to root_v3.04.02.
> >
> > In order to find the reason of decreased performance we have run
> standard
> > root benchmarks with precompiled root versions as well as
root_v3.05.04
> > compiled from sources.
> > The comparison was done on the same computers with the only
difference
> > being root version used. Most dramatic difference is with
> > $ROOTSYS/test/hsimple.cxx which seems to be more than 4 times slower
> with
> > ROOT 3.05/04.
> > Does anyone observed similar decrease of performance with
root_v3.05.04
> > or have hints what could be wrong?
> >
> > Andrzej Kupsc
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > The Svedberg Laboratory,
> > Uppsala University, Uppsala.
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > --------------------
> > Results of the tests
> > --------------------
> > ROOT versions used for tests:
> > root_v3.04.02.Linux.RH7.2.gcc296.tar.gz
> > root_v3.05.04.Linux.RH7.3.gcc296.tar.gz
> > root_v3.05.04 recompiled from sources was also tested but that
make
> > no differences with root_v3.05.04.Linux.RH7.3.gcc296
> > also we have tried root_v3.05.03 which behaves similar
> >
> >
> > **1** Script benchmark.C is 2x slower for hsimple and
> > hsum we run it on our 2 computers (1 and 2 processor)
> > with RH 7.1 (but results are similar on a computer with RH 7.3)
> >
> > computer1: 2x Pentium III
> > cpu MHz : 799.693
> > kernel : 2.4.18-27.7.xsmp
> > Processing benchmark: rootmarks.C
> > ---------------ROOT 3.04/02 benchmarks summary--------------------
> > hsimple : Real Time = 0.71 seconds Cpu Time = 0.65 seconds
> > hsum : Real Time = 0.31 seconds Cpu Time = 0.30 seconds
> > .....
> > ---------------ROOT 3.05/04 benchmarks summary--------------------
> > hsimple : Real Time = 1.32 seconds Cpu Time = 1.21 seconds
> > hsum : Real Time = 0.83 seconds Cpu Time = 0.83 seconds
> > ....
> >
> > computer2: 1x Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.80GHz
> > gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-98)
> > Linux: 2.4.7-10
> >
> > Processing benchmark: rootmarks.C
> > ---------------ROOT 3.05/04 benchmarks summary--------------------
> > hsimple : Real Time = 1.62 seconds Cpu Time = 0.89 seconds
> > hsum : Real Time = 1.10 seconds Cpu Time = 0.60 seconds
> > ....
> > Processing benchmark: rootmarks.C
> > ---------------ROOT 3.04/02 benchmarks summary--------------------
> > hsimple : Real Time = 0.84 seconds Cpu Time = 0.47 seconds
> > hsum : Real Time = 0.42 seconds Cpu Time = 0.22 seconds
> > ....
> >
> > **2**
> > Standard $ROOTSYS/test/hsimple.cxx with standard Makefile was used.
> > In order to test speed the event loop in the hsimple.cxx were
increased
> to
> > 1M events and TStopwatch was put at the beginning and at the end of
the
> > program to measure performance.
> >
> > computer1:
> > ROOT 3.05/04
> > ./hsimple
> > Time : RT= 11.53 s Cpu= 11.44 s
> > ROOT 3.04/02
> > ./hsimple
> > Time : RT= 2.20 s Cpu= 2.19 s
> >
> > computer2:
> > ROOT 3.05/04
> > ./hsimple
> > Time : RT= 7.88 s Cpu= 7.67 s
> > ROOT 3.04/02
> > ./hsimple
> > Time : RT= 1.87 s Cpu= 1.84 s
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 17:50:11 MET