This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 17057

Summary:	GeneralCommandAction.enable(Node[]) is too slow
Product:	obsolete	Reporter:	Jesse Glick <jglick>
Component:	vcscore	Assignee:	Milos Kleint <mkleint>
Status:	CLOSED FIXED
Severity:	blocker	Keywords:	PERFORMANCE
Priority:	P4
Version:	3.x
Hardware:	PC
OS:	Linux
Issue Type:	DEFECT	Exception Reporter:

Description Jesse Glick 2001-10-26 20:57:21 UTC

[dev oct 25] That is, it is specifically visible in a profiler as
consuming time when the node selection in the Explorer is changed. I
did not even have any VCS filesystems mounted, yet it consumed 0.33%
of CPU, comparable to "heavyweight" actions like Paste. (Nor did I
right-click any nodes during this period, so maybe it should not have
been run at all, but that is a core problem if true.) It ought to have
a "fast track" to returning false, under the assumption that usually
the selected nodes are not in fact data nodes on VCS filesystems.

Comment 1 Milos Kleint 2001-10-27 10:57:37 UTC

I've checked the code and there is *some* place for speedup when the
fileobjects are not from vcs..we should not check for anything when
there are no actions in the toolbar etc..

Comment 2 Milos Kleint 2001-10-29 16:05:32 UTC

if there are no VCS actions in the toolbar, the AbstractCommandAction
no more collects the fileobjects, the generalCommandAction now sets
the tooltips less often then before.. 
fixed on 29/Oct/2001
please check if the speed improved. I've done some checking myself
using OptimizeIt, however got different results each time I tried.
What is your methodology to get comparable results?

Comment 3 Jesse Glick 2001-10-29 18:38:19 UTC

I don't have any methodology. :-) I noticed this action in a time
profile after selecting some Explorer nodes, that is all (whereas most
individual actions should not take enough time to enable/disable to be
noticeable). Since the total time taken was not so much, I am not sure
if I could reliably tell if your fix corrected it, but what you did
sounds like an improvement. As a rule I guess, if a user is not
actively using some module, nothing about it should appear in the
interesting parts of a profiler's output.

Comment 4 Jiri Kovalsky 2001-10-30 16:58:29 UTC

Do you think Jesse that this could be verified ?

Comment 5 Jesse Glick 2001-10-30 20:01:31 UTC

Sure, as verified as it's going to get.

Comment 6 Quality Engineering 2003-07-01 12:56:14 UTC

Resolved for 3.4.x or earlier, no new info since then -> closing.