[arch-general] Something wrong with firefox/thunderbird driving X cpu usage -> 100%
Guys, I have watched this in top for the past week or so. Thunderbird and Firefox are causing X cpu usage to shoot upt to between 80-100% on simple tasks like scrolling a message list in tbird or simply opening css menus in firefox. All of this used to be instantaneous and never cause the cpu to bat an eye. But now, it is very pronounced and brings the desktop to a crawl. This box is not a screamer, but plenty fast, P4 2800/4G/Nvidia 8600GT. How do I determine what is causing this? X? ff/tb? something else? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On 08/08/2012 08:34 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
Guys,
I have watched this in top for the past week or so. Thunderbird and Firefox are causing X cpu usage to shoot upt to between 80-100% on simple tasks like scrolling a message list in tbird or simply opening css menus in firefox. All of this used to be instantaneous and never cause the cpu to bat an eye. But now, it is very pronounced and brings the desktop to a crawl. This box is not a screamer, but plenty fast, P4 2800/4G/Nvidia 8600GT.
How do I determine what is causing this? X? ff/tb? something else? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks.
You seem to be very fortunate lately. What seems to be the common thread?
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 07:34:14 -0500 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Guys,
I have watched this in top for the past week or so. Thunderbird and Firefox are causing X cpu usage to shoot upt to between 80-100% on simple tasks like scrolling a message list in tbird or simply opening css menus in firefox. All of this used to be instantaneous and never cause the cpu to bat an eye. But now, it is very pronounced and brings the desktop to a crawl. This box is not a screamer, but plenty fast, P4 2800/4G/Nvidia 8600GT.
How do I determine what is causing this? X? ff/tb? something else? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks.
My suggestion: remove firefox and install firefox from mozilla.com. When a similar experience occurred for me, I did that and found that the response was much better in the version from mozilla.com. T.
I saw an email just like this like week and made a switch to chromium. There is a difference. Especially when opening a new window, Firefox has some very large spikes. Don't use Thunderbird so I cannot say anything about that. On Aug 8, 2012 6:30 AM, "Thaddeus Nielsen" <thaddeus.nielsen@gmx.us> wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 07:34:14 -0500 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Guys,
I have watched this in top for the past week or so. Thunderbird and Firefox are causing X cpu usage to shoot upt to between 80-100% on simple tasks like scrolling a message list in tbird or simply opening css menus in firefox. All of this used to be instantaneous and never cause the cpu to bat an eye. But now, it is very pronounced and brings the desktop to a crawl. This box is not a screamer, but plenty fast, P4 2800/4G/Nvidia 8600GT.
How do I determine what is causing this? X? ff/tb? something else? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks.
My suggestion: remove firefox and install firefox from mozilla.com. When a similar experience occurred for me, I did that and found that the response was much better in the version from mozilla.com.
T.
On 08/08/2012 09:33 AM, Adam Sparks wrote:
I saw an email just like this like week and made a switch to chromium. There is a difference. Especially when opening a new window, Firefox has some very large spikes. Don't use Thunderbird so I cannot say anything about that. On Aug 8, 2012 6:30 AM, "Thaddeus Nielsen" <thaddeus.nielsen@gmx.us> wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 07:34:14 -0500 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Guys,
I have watched this in top for the past week or so. Thunderbird and Firefox are causing X cpu usage to shoot upt to between 80-100% on simple tasks like scrolling a message list in tbird or simply opening css menus in firefox. All of this used to be instantaneous and never cause the cpu to bat an eye. But now, it is very pronounced and brings the desktop to a crawl. This box is not a screamer, but plenty fast, P4 2800/4G/Nvidia 8600GT.
How do I determine what is causing this? X? ff/tb? something else? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks.
My suggestion: remove firefox and install firefox from mozilla.com. When a similar experience occurred for me, I did that and found that the response was much better in the version from mozilla.com.
T.
What version of thunderbird where you using?
I have 13.0 top - 12:45:03 up 3 min, 4 users, load average: 0.94, 0.50, 0.21 Tasks: 198 total, 2 running, 196 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu0 : 6.4%us, 1.6%sy, 0.0%ni, 90.0%id, 1.0%wa, 0.6%hi, 0.3%si, 0.0%st Cpu1 : 2.7%us, 1.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.3%id, 0.0%wa, 0.7%hi, 1.3%si, 0.0%st Cpu2 : 1.3%us, 0.7%sy, 0.0%ni, 98.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu3 : 4.0%us, 1.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 8175488k total, 1164556k used, 7010932k free, 30860k buffers Swap: 10485756k total, 0k used, 10485756k free, 453308k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 1341 root 20 0 194m 44m 9m S 4.0 0.6 0:07.40 X 1834 user 20 0 926m 109m 36m S 3.3 1.4 0:06.86 thunderbird This is the most cpu that thunderbird uses
On 08/08/2012 11:46 AM, Baho Utot wrote:
What version of thunderbird where you using?
I have 13.0
I have 14.0. You are very lucky, I see anywhere from 30-99.9% when accessing folders, scrolling, etc.. After it completes all operations, then it will settle down to 0.3%. I have tried different desktops, fluxbox, gnome, etc.. and the behavior remains the same (better in fluxbox, but not by much) I guess this is something I will just have to watch. Nothing jumps out as being the cause. I don't know if there is something gtk related that could do it, or what other errors I would expect to see if that were the case. I'll poke around some more and report back with anything that looks promising. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On 08/08/2012 08:33 AM, Adam Sparks wrote:
I saw an email just like this like week and made a switch to chromium. There is a difference. Especially when opening a new window, Firefox has some very large spikes. Don't use Thunderbird so I cannot say anything about that.
Thanks, If you are running chromium -- *make sure* you tweak the privacy settings to that it isn't sending all your browsing information back to its master. That is the primary reason I do not use it. I know it isn't as bad on Linux as on windows, but there are still concerns. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On 08/08/2012 02:34 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
Guys,
I have watched this in top for the past week or so. Thunderbird and Firefox are causing X cpu usage to shoot upt to between 80-100% on simple tasks like scrolling a message list in tbird or simply opening css menus in firefox. All of this used to be instantaneous and never cause the cpu to bat an eye. But now, it is very pronounced and brings the desktop to a crawl. This box is not a screamer, but plenty fast, P4 2800/4G/Nvidia 8600GT.
How do I determine what is causing this? X? ff/tb? something else? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks.
Same here on a fairly recent machine with an Intel GPU. I use chromium for web browsing and that is no problem at all there. However, thunderbird really doesn't like my CPU.
On 08/08/2012 03:20 PM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
On 08/08/2012 02:34 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
Guys,
I have watched this in top for the past week or so. Thunderbird and Firefox are causing X cpu usage to shoot upt to between 80-100% on simple tasks like scrolling a message list in tbird or simply opening css menus in firefox. All of this used to be instantaneous and never cause the cpu to bat an eye. But now, it is very pronounced and brings the desktop to a crawl. This box is not a screamer, but plenty fast, P4 2800/4G/Nvidia 8600GT.
How do I determine what is causing this? X? ff/tb? something else? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks.
Same here on a fairly recent machine with an Intel GPU. I use chromium for web browsing and that is no problem at all there. However, thunderbird really doesn't like my CPU.
I can confirm that thunderbird uses 100% CPU from time to time, often without any apparent reason. (Sometimes I didn't even look at it for hours) Normally, it does that for about five minutes and then goes back to sleep. </serious-and-contructive-part> <flame> Thunderbird really is a big pile of crap. There are bugs everywhere! I havn't seen something this bad since KDE 4.0. The only reason I didn't switch to mutt yet is that I don't know how to replace the filter feature. Regards, PyroPeter -- freenode/pyropeter ETAOIN SHRDLU
I run firefox 14.0.1 and thunderbird 14.0 from extra and don't have any issues with performance. Have you checked your plugins to see if any of those might causing issues? Squall -- Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift. That's why its called the present. Headmaster Squall :: The Wired/Section-9 Close the world txen eht nepo $3R14L 3XP3R1M3NT$ #L41N http://twitter.com/headmastersqual
I've got similar issues with Thunderbird, when I've got installed enigmail. Maybe that's the issue? On 08/09/2012 05:04 PM, Squall Lionheart wrote:
I run firefox 14.0.1 and thunderbird 14.0 from extra and don't have any issues with performance. Have you checked your plugins to see if any of those might causing issues?
Squall
-- Pozdrawiam/Cheers Łukasz Redynk
I've got similar issues with Thunderbird, when I've got installed enigmail. Maybe that's the issue?
I would suggest disabling all your add ons and see if anything changes with your cpu usage. I run these apps on a regular bases with minimal extensions and have never had cpu usage issues, unless a poorly written web page start to freak out. Squall -- Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift. That's why its called the present. Headmaster Squall :: The Wired/Section-9 Close the world txen eht nepo $3R14L 3XP3R1M3NT$ #L41N http://twitter.com/headmastersqual
On 08/08/2012 03:20 PM, PyroPeter wrote:
<flame>
Thunderbird really is a big pile of crap. There are bugs everywhere! I havn't seen something this bad since KDE 4.0. The only reason I didn't switch to mutt yet is that I don't know how to replace the filter feature.
You know when projects start playing the 'version number game' the important part of development suffers. I have used thunderbird for years without complaint. In the past 12 months it has archived mail into oblivion and really suffered a lot from the (I want to be a web browser too) bloat... It is comical to think how many years it took to go from version 1.x to version 2.x in slow measured steps, and now: [2010-04-22 22:19] installed thunderbird (3.0.4-1) [2010-07-11 04:05] upgraded thunderbird (3.0.4-1 -> 3.1-2) [2010-07-20 15:43] upgraded thunderbird (3.1-2 -> 3.1.1-1) [2010-08-09 02:27] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.1-1 -> 3.1.2-1) [2010-09-09 23:22] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.2-1 -> 3.1.3-1) [2010-09-18 17:57] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.3-1 -> 3.1.4-1) [2010-09-28 18:58] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.4-1 -> 3.1.4-2) [2010-10-19 18:21] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.4-2 -> 3.1.5-1) [2010-10-30 01:05] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.5-1 -> 3.1.6-1) [2010-12-09 16:46] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.6-1 -> 3.1.7-1) [2010-12-11 15:03] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.7-1 -> 3.1.7-2) [2010-12-31 15:01] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.7-2 -> 3.1.7-3) [2011-03-01 20:56] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.7-3 -> 3.1.8-1) [2011-03-07 15:01] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.8-1 -> 3.1.9-1) [2011-03-16 12:24] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.9-1 -> 3.1.9-2) [2011-04-29 14:44] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.9-2 -> 3.1.10-1) [2011-05-04 00:25] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.10-1 -> 3.1.10-2) [2011-06-05 17:13] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.10-2 -> 3.1.10-3) [2011-06-22 14:05] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.10-3 -> 3.1.11-1) [2011-06-29 08:26] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.11-1 -> 5.0-1) [2011-06-29 11:05] upgraded thunderbird (5.0-1 -> 3.1.11-1) [2011-06-30 15:43] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.11-1 -> 5.0-1) [2011-08-17 08:58] upgraded thunderbird (5.0-1 -> 6.0-1) [2011-08-31 10:29] upgraded thunderbird (6.0-1 -> 6.0.1-1) [2011-09-06 21:55] upgraded thunderbird (6.0.1-1 -> 6.0.2-1) [2011-09-28 01:01] upgraded thunderbird (6.0.2-1 -> 7.0-1) [2011-10-03 13:24] upgraded thunderbird (7.0-1 -> 7.0.1-1) [2011-11-08 15:51] upgraded thunderbird (7.0.1-1 -> 8.0-1) [2011-12-22 11:45] upgraded thunderbird (8.0-1 -> 9.0-1) [2011-12-24 22:17] upgraded thunderbird (9.0-1 -> 9.0.1-1) [2012-02-03 10:22] upgraded thunderbird (9.0.1-1 -> 10.0-0) [2012-02-07 09:48] upgraded thunderbird (10.0-0 -> 10.0-2) [2012-02-13 13:44] upgraded thunderbird (10.0-2 -> 10.0.1-1) [2012-02-17 11:54] upgraded thunderbird (10.0.1-1 -> 10.0.2-1) [2012-03-19 13:20] upgraded thunderbird (10.0.2-1 -> 11.0-1) [2012-04-05 14:44] upgraded thunderbird (11.0-1 -> 11.0.1-1) [2012-04-23 16:11] upgraded thunderbird (11.0.1-1 -> 11.0.1-2) [2012-04-26 09:00] upgraded thunderbird (11.0.1-2 -> 12.0-1) [2012-05-09 16:24] upgraded thunderbird (12.0-1 -> 12.0.1-1) [2012-06-14 13:39] upgraded thunderbird (12.0.1-1 -> 13.0-1) [2012-06-19 13:06] upgraded thunderbird (13.0-1 -> 13.0.1-1) [2012-07-20 11:15] upgraded thunderbird (13.0.1-1 -> 14.0-1) Oh well, so goes many projects... -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
My opinion is that they are trying to keep up with the version number of chromium. So many in the past have plaid with version numbers to make them selfs "look" better and more mature. M$ has done it, Slackware did it, Mozilla is doing it... $ pacman -Ss chromium extra/chromium 21.0.1180.75-1 Squall -- Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift. That's why its called the present. Headmaster Squall :: The Wired/Section-9 Close the world txen eht nepo $3R14L 3XP3R1M3NT$ #L41N http://twitter.com/headmastersqual
On 08/09/2012 03:54 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 08/08/2012 03:20 PM, PyroPeter wrote:
<flame>
Thunderbird really is a big pile of crap. There are bugs everywhere! I havn't seen something this bad since KDE 4.0. The only reason I didn't switch to mutt yet is that I don't know how to replace the filter feature.
You know when projects start playing the 'version number game' the important part of development suffers. I have used thunderbird for years without complaint. In the past 12 months it has archived mail into oblivion and really suffered a lot from the (I want to be a web browser too) bloat...
It is comical to think how many years it took to go from version 1.x to version 2.x in slow measured steps, and now:
[2010-04-22 22:19] installed thunderbird (3.0.4-1) [2010-07-11 04:05] upgraded thunderbird (3.0.4-1 -> 3.1-2) [2010-07-20 15:43] upgraded thunderbird (3.1-2 -> 3.1.1-1) [2010-08-09 02:27] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.1-1 -> 3.1.2-1) [2010-09-09 23:22] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.2-1 -> 3.1.3-1) [2010-09-18 17:57] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.3-1 -> 3.1.4-1) [2010-09-28 18:58] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.4-1 -> 3.1.4-2) [2010-10-19 18:21] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.4-2 -> 3.1.5-1) [2010-10-30 01:05] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.5-1 -> 3.1.6-1) [2010-12-09 16:46] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.6-1 -> 3.1.7-1) [2010-12-11 15:03] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.7-1 -> 3.1.7-2) [2010-12-31 15:01] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.7-2 -> 3.1.7-3) [2011-03-01 20:56] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.7-3 -> 3.1.8-1) [2011-03-07 15:01] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.8-1 -> 3.1.9-1) [2011-03-16 12:24] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.9-1 -> 3.1.9-2) [2011-04-29 14:44] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.9-2 -> 3.1.10-1) [2011-05-04 00:25] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.10-1 -> 3.1.10-2) [2011-06-05 17:13] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.10-2 -> 3.1.10-3) [2011-06-22 14:05] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.10-3 -> 3.1.11-1) [2011-06-29 08:26] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.11-1 -> 5.0-1) [2011-06-29 11:05] upgraded thunderbird (5.0-1 -> 3.1.11-1) [2011-06-30 15:43] upgraded thunderbird (3.1.11-1 -> 5.0-1) [2011-08-17 08:58] upgraded thunderbird (5.0-1 -> 6.0-1) [2011-08-31 10:29] upgraded thunderbird (6.0-1 -> 6.0.1-1) [2011-09-06 21:55] upgraded thunderbird (6.0.1-1 -> 6.0.2-1) [2011-09-28 01:01] upgraded thunderbird (6.0.2-1 -> 7.0-1) [2011-10-03 13:24] upgraded thunderbird (7.0-1 -> 7.0.1-1) [2011-11-08 15:51] upgraded thunderbird (7.0.1-1 -> 8.0-1) [2011-12-22 11:45] upgraded thunderbird (8.0-1 -> 9.0-1) [2011-12-24 22:17] upgraded thunderbird (9.0-1 -> 9.0.1-1) [2012-02-03 10:22] upgraded thunderbird (9.0.1-1 -> 10.0-0) [2012-02-07 09:48] upgraded thunderbird (10.0-0 -> 10.0-2) [2012-02-13 13:44] upgraded thunderbird (10.0-2 -> 10.0.1-1) [2012-02-17 11:54] upgraded thunderbird (10.0.1-1 -> 10.0.2-1) [2012-03-19 13:20] upgraded thunderbird (10.0.2-1 -> 11.0-1) [2012-04-05 14:44] upgraded thunderbird (11.0-1 -> 11.0.1-1) [2012-04-23 16:11] upgraded thunderbird (11.0.1-1 -> 11.0.1-2) [2012-04-26 09:00] upgraded thunderbird (11.0.1-2 -> 12.0-1) [2012-05-09 16:24] upgraded thunderbird (12.0-1 -> 12.0.1-1) [2012-06-14 13:39] upgraded thunderbird (12.0.1-1 -> 13.0-1) [2012-06-19 13:06] upgraded thunderbird (13.0-1 -> 13.0.1-1) [2012-07-20 11:15] upgraded thunderbird (13.0.1-1 -> 14.0-1)
Oh well, so goes many projects...
Must keep up with the I need a new version because the old one is working too well. Must find something to break Aye, the microsoft culture has finally invaded linux.
On 08/09/2012 03:56 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
Must keep up with the I need a new version because the old one is working too well. Must find something to break
Aye, the microsoft culture has finally invaded linux.
No kidding! In more ways than one... It's nice to know the new thunderbird only requires about 100M more RAM than thunderbird 2.x did. Good lord! So much for tight, well optimized code that uses minimal resources. Take a look at: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Testing:Memory_Usage_Problems ** don't forget to look under the "References" section at the end. Especially the bug fixes that talk about correcting "massive memory usage"... -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 04:14:20PM -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 08/09/2012 03:56 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
Must keep up with the I need a new version because the old one is working too well. Must find something to break
Aye, the microsoft culture has finally invaded linux.
No kidding!
In more ways than one... It's nice to know the new thunderbird only requires about 100M more RAM than thunderbird 2.x did. Good lord! So much for tight, well optimized code that uses minimal resources. Take a look at:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Testing:Memory_Usage_Problems
** don't forget to look under the "References" section at the end. Especially the bug fixes that talk about correcting "massive memory usage"...
Why don't you guys try something like claws or sylpheed, if you are having problem with thunderbird. I have used claws a couple of times and I can say that it consumes minimal resources (for a graphical client). Also, for browser based solutions maybe you can give opera (it includes a good email client), or seamonkey a try. In the end if you don't have something against cli clients, you can try mutt or sup.
On 08/10/2012 12:41 AM, gt wrote:
Why don't you guys try something like claws or sylpheed, if you are having problem with thunderbird. I have used claws a couple of times and I can say that it consumes minimal resources (for a graphical client).
Unless lots has changed recently, Claws is not really a great replacement for TB. In large part due to lack of html compose support (e.g. font control and tables can be pretty darn important for some). Evolution might be, tho it used to crash a lot - perhaps it has improved recently and is worth trying again. I use a local imap server for local storage - even on my laptop - so I can change email clients with zero dependence on any clients local storage quirks. I am running TB 17 - one thing worth checking is to ensure GLODA is turned off (edit->prefs->advanced->general). This has caused terrible cpu and io activity for me in the past. On my laptop, while roaming, if i lose connections - then sometimes TB re-checks and indexes things - which causes CPU spikes for a bit - but they go away. gene
On 08/10/2012 08:35 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
On 08/10/2012 12:41 AM, gt wrote:
Why don't you guys try something like claws or sylpheed, if you are having problem with thunderbird. I have used claws a couple of times and I can say that it consumes minimal resources (for a graphical client).
Unless lots has changed recently, Claws is not really a great replacement for TB. In large part due to lack of html compose support (e.g. font control and tables can be pretty darn important for some). Evolution might be, tho it used to crash a lot - perhaps it has improved recently and is worth trying again.
I use a local imap server for local storage - even on my laptop - so I can change email clients with zero dependence on any clients local storage quirks.
I am running TB 17 - one thing worth checking is to ensure GLODA is turned off (edit->prefs->advanced->general). This has caused terrible cpu and io activity for me in the past.
On my laptop, while roaming, if i lose connections - then sometimes TB re-checks and indexes things - which causes CPU spikes for a bit - but they go away.
gene
That is the sad point of all of this. Since 1.X tbird has done one thing and done one thing well - provided an excellent graphical mail client, with very capable and flexible filtering, and been able to handle large mbox files without issue. It is hard to find a good comparable replacement. All of which makes the recent developments in tbird very troubling. Opera works, I've used it for years, but it has a very non-intuitive folder/filter setup. (I'm old-school, I want a browser to browse and a mail client to do mail, and I don't want either to do the others job - except for the mailer to display html e-mail when some unwitting soul send it to me) That's because many times I'm composing a message while making reference to a web page. I know you can pop most compose windows out into separate windows, but I just prefer a separate browser and mail client. I used sylpheed-claws (5 years ago or so) and didn't have any big complaints, I just found tbird (at the time) the better of the two packages. I do prefer a gui client. I use pine/alpine, but I've always found it easier to cut/paste between gui clients. We will just have to wait and see if mozilla can get the "massive memory usage" bugs fixed. There isn't any technical reason why they can't as long as they focus on performance issues rather then version competition and arguments like hiding the version number in the 'about' dialog. (yes, that is actually what mozilla planned to do...) -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Genes MailLists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
On 08/10/2012 12:41 AM, gt wrote:
Why don't you guys try something like claws or sylpheed, if you are having problem with thunderbird. I have used claws a couple of times and I can say that it consumes minimal resources (for a graphical client).
Unless lots has changed recently, Claws is not really a great replacement for TB. In large part due to lack of html compose support (e.g. font control and tables can be pretty darn important for some). Evolution might be, tho it used to crash a lot - perhaps it has improved recently and is worth trying again.
I use a local imap server for local storage - even on my laptop - so I can change email clients with zero dependence on any clients local storage quirks.
I am running TB 17 - one thing worth checking is to ensure GLODA is turned off (edit->prefs->advanced->general). This has caused terrible cpu and io activity for me in the past.
On my laptop, while roaming, if i lose connections - then sometimes TB re-checks and indexes things - which causes CPU spikes for a bit - but they go away.
Gene, your comment above about GLODA is an important one and one which quite a few people seem not to be aware of - when TB first moved to GLODA it was automatically switched on when updating TB from the previous version - and caused me lots of CPU spikes at the time, and indeed when it was re-indexing long periods of huge CPU usage - at that time (way back from the current time) I switched off GLODA permanently, and all the CPU usage issues went away - and I have never had any problems since - and have never switched GLODA back on! It might be an idea to try switching off GLODA and see if the CPU high usage issues remain or not - if they go away then the likely culprit was GLODA. -- mike c
I don't see an option related to GLODA in edit->prefs->advanced->general, is it the same as "Enable Global Search and Indexer"? Thanks Squall On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 9:57 AM, mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com>wrote:
On 08/10/2012 12:41 AM, gt wrote:
Why don't you guys try something like claws or sylpheed, if you are having problem with thunderbird. I have used claws a couple of times and I can say that it consumes minimal resources (for a graphical client).
Unless lots has changed recently, Claws is not really a great replacement for TB. In large part due to lack of html compose support (e.g. font control and tables can be pretty darn important for some). Evolution might be,
it used to crash a lot - perhaps it has improved recently and is worth trying again.
I use a local imap server for local storage - even on my laptop - so I can change email clients with zero dependence on any clients local storage quirks.
I am running TB 17 - one thing worth checking is to ensure GLODA is turned off (edit->prefs->advanced->general). This has caused terrible cpu and io activity for me in the past.
On my laptop, while roaming, if i lose connections - then sometimes TB re-checks and indexes things - which causes CPU spikes for a bit - but
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Genes MailLists <lists@sapience.com> wrote: tho they
go away.
Gene, your comment above about GLODA is an important one and one which quite a few people seem not to be aware of - when TB first moved to GLODA it was automatically switched on when updating TB from the previous version - and caused me lots of CPU spikes at the time, and indeed when it was re-indexing long periods of huge CPU usage - at that time (way back from the current time) I switched off GLODA permanently, and all the CPU usage issues went away - and I have never had any problems since - and have never switched GLODA back on!
It might be an idea to try switching off GLODA and see if the CPU high usage issues remain or not - if they go away then the likely culprit was GLODA.
-- mike c
-- Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift. That's why its called the present. Headmaster Squall :: The Wired/Section-9 Close the world txen eht nepo $3R14L 3XP3R1M3NT$ #L41N http://twitter.com/headmastersqual
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Squall Lionheart <headmastersquall@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't see an option related to GLODA in edit->prefs->advanced->general, is it the same as "Enable Global Search and Indexer"?
Thanks Squall
Yes under exactly that option select to "not" Enable Global Search and Indexer - then you will not have GLODA running - you will need to restart TB before it is switched off though. -- mike c
participants (11)
-
Adam Sparks
-
Baho Utot
-
David C. Rankin
-
Genes MailLists
-
gt
-
mike cloaked
-
PyroPeter
-
Squall Lionheart
-
Sven-Hendrik Haase
-
Thaddeus Nielsen
-
Łukasz Redynk