|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 9/20/2008
Posts: 76
Location: California
|
To tkaraoke team,
Is it possible for tkaraoke to only scan for songs only if there are changes in checksum or bite count for the folder containing the music files? this will cut the start up time a bit, I know most of us will not update our songs list on a daily bases. It would be nice to cut down the start up time for us tester.
kdoweb
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 4/9/2008
Posts: 1,292
Location: California, USA
|
Request added. Version 1.2.0.015 doesn't extract the zip file at startup - it only does a quick peak at the zip file to see if it's a valid mp3+g file. How long does it take to startup TKaraoke for you? How many files do you have?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 9/20/2008
Posts: 76
Location: California
|
vcdz382 wrote:Request added. Version 1.2.0.015 doesn't extract the zip file at startup - it only does a quick peak at the zip file to see if it's a valid mp3+g file. How long does it take to startup TKaraoke for you? How many files do you have? I have 2714 mkv files and 405 mp3+g and my startup time is 1 minute and 5 seconds my system is quad core 2.4 with 4 gig of ram. My files are located on an internal SATA drive. kdoweb
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 4/9/2008
Posts: 1,292
Location: California, USA
|
kdoweb wrote:vcdz382 wrote:Request added. Version 1.2.0.015 doesn't extract the zip file at startup - it only does a quick peak at the zip file to see if it's a valid mp3+g file. How long does it take to startup TKaraoke for you? How many files do you have? I have 2714 mkv files and 405 mp3+g and my startup time is 1 minute and 5 seconds my system is quad core 2.4 with 4 gig of ram. My files are located on an internal SATA drive. kdoweb Can you select the mp3+g zip file only and see how long it take? And then select the mkv files only and see how long ti takes. Then take the average time per file to load each zip/mkv file. I wonder how much slower zip is compared to mkv. Some of the startup time are fixed time and can't be speed up.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 9/20/2008
Posts: 76
Location: California
|
vcdz382 wrote:kdoweb wrote:vcdz382 wrote:Request added. Version 1.2.0.015 doesn't extract the zip file at startup - it only does a quick peak at the zip file to see if it's a valid mp3+g file. How long does it take to startup TKaraoke for you? How many files do you have? I have 2714 mkv files and 405 mp3+g and my startup time is 1 minute and 5 seconds my system is quad core 2.4 with 4 gig of ram. My files are located on an internal SATA drive. kdoweb Can you select the mp3+g zip file only and see how long it take? And then select the mkv files only and see how long ti takes. Then take the average time per file to load each zip/mkv file. I wonder how much slower zip is compared to mkv. Some of the startup time are fixed time and can't be speed up. OK, here are the results with just the 405 MP3+G in zip after 10 tried my result were 20-22 seconds from the time I start tkaraoke until it fully launches. With 405 mkv files it was more less the same 19-22 seconds. with no song selected it took 12-15 seconds. and with 2969 mkv and 405 zip to took a whooping 65 to 70 seconds. If the scanning and sorting of the songs were done only if there were changes the start up time would be cut considerably if one were to have say 10,000 songs. kdoweb
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 4/9/2008
Posts: 1,292
Location: California, USA
|
Thanks for the measurements. Your results show that TKaraoke process zip files quite fast since the total time is almost as fast as mkv files. As far as improving the overall startup time, we have identified a key function that's responsible for about 20% of the startup time. This funtion can be improved to reduce about 20% of the startup time. Interestingly, as shown below, the time it takes to process the song files account to only about 50% of the startup time. In the measurement below, I ran TKaraoke on Windows Vista 64-bit, QuadCore, 4GB of RAM and there are 4885 mkv/vob songs on a network drive. This network drive was hosted on another slower machine but the hard drive is on RAID-0 SATA II. Note that for security reasons, I masked out un-important sections of the result. Note also that there are 2 threads running in parallel so 74.294 seconds was the total running time. Hence, each percent shown should be doubled to reflect the fact that both threads are running in parallel and both threads take about 50% of the time. If HideDGVColumns can be improved significantly, we would have saved 9.76*2 ~= 20% of the startup time.  File Attachment(s):
 StartupPerformance.jpg (356kb) downloaded 274 time(s).
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 9/20/2008
Posts: 76
Location: California
|
vcdz382 wrote:Thanks for the measurements. Your results show that TKaraoke process zip files quite fast since the total time is almost as fast as mkv files. As far as improving the overall startup time, we have identified a key function that's responsible for about 20% of the startup time. This funtion can be improved to reduce about 20% of the startup time. Interestingly, as shown below, the time it takes to process the song files account to only about 50% of the startup time. In the measurement below, I ran TKaraoke on Windows Vista 64-bit, QuadCore, 4GB of RAM and there are 4885 mkv/vob songs on a network drive. This network drive was hosted on another slower machine but the hard drive is on RAID-0 SATA II. Note that for security reasons, I masked out un-important sections of the result. Note also that there are 2 threads running in parallel so 77.294 seconds was the total running time. Hence, each percent shown should be doubled to reflect the fact that both threads are running in parallel and both threads take about 50% of the time. If HideDGVColumns can be improved significantly, we would have saved 9.76*2 ~= 20% of the startup time. Nice! if you guys can cut the start up time by 20% with scan and 50% without scan that would be awesome. kdoweb
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 4/9/2008
Posts: 1,292
Location: California, USA
|
We had to make quite a bit of changes to use the new efficient data structure. The result is a whooping 35% reduction in startup time. So for my case, the startup time is 47 seconds instead of 74 seconds! The new data structure helps with performance across the board including the elimination of HideDGVColumns (20% saving), column filtering, and sorting. Not related to the startup time, searching is also faster now. Sorting the songs by song name, singer name, author name, or lyric is also faster.
Version 1.2.0.019 will have this performance boost. There are a lot of changes to the code so it will take our testers a while for regression testing.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 9/20/2008
Posts: 76
Location: California
|
vcdz382 wrote:We had to make quite a bit of changes to use the new efficient data structure. The result is a whooping 35% reduction in startup time. So for my case, the startup time is 47 seconds instead of 74 seconds! The new data structure helps with performance across the board including the elimination of HideDGVColumns (20% saving), column filtering, and sorting. Not related to the startup time, searching is also faster now. Sorting the songs by song name, singer name, author name, or lyric is also faster.
Version 1.2.0.019 will have this performance boost. There are a lot of changes to the code so it will take our testers a while for regression testing. Very nice :d/ looking froward to it. kdoweb
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 4/9/2008
Posts: 1,292
Location: California, USA
|
Version 1.2.0.019 released. 70% startup time reduction w/ no scan, 35% reduction w/ scan!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 9/20/2008
Posts: 76
Location: California
|
vcdz382 wrote:Version 1.2.0.019 released. 70% startup time reduction w/ no scan, 35% reduction w/ scan! Here are the new test results with version 19. Test environment: Intel quad core 2.4 GHz. 4GB RAM. Vista 32bit. internal SATA. 10 tries on all calculations. From the tkaraoke start until it fully launches. OK, here are the results with version 1.2.0.019: with no song selected: It took 8-11 seconds (Down from 12-15sec.). 405 MP3+G in zip with songs scaned my result were 12-13 seconds (Down from 20-22 sec.). 405 MP3+G in zip without songs scaned my result were 8-11 sec.405 mkv files with songs scaned my result were 12-13 seconds (Down from 20-22 sec.) 405 mkv files without songs scaned my result were 8-11 seconds.2790 mkv and 409 zip files with songs scaned my result were 30-31 seconds (Down from 65-70 sec.) 2790 mkv and 409 zip files without songs scaned my result were 15-16 sec.Wow! very nice improvement. the average users with about 3000 songs can shave off 70% startup time if no changes are made to the data folders. very nicely done guys!!! kdoweb
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 4/9/2008
Posts: 1,292
Location: California, USA
|
Version 1.3.0.027 significantly updated the known song names database. Hence, the startup time increased a little bit (about 5-8 seconds). Version 1.3.0.031 cut down about 15 seconds of startup time independent of how many songs you have. So if your songs are cached or no song is loaded, TKaraoke can startup in less than 5 seconds instead of about 20 seconds in previous versions.
|
|
|
Guest |
