#12279 closed defect (fixed)
JOSM hangs when opening a large file
Reported by: | Adrian | Owned by: | team |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | critical | Milestone: | 16.01 |
Component: | Core mappaint | Version: | tested |
Keywords: | template_report regression performance partial fill | Cc: | bastiK, Klumbumbus |
Description
What steps will reproduce the problem?
- Launch JOSM
- Open a large file (~60MB in .osm format)
What is the expected result?
The file is opened after a short wait.
What happens instead?
JOSM hangs at 100% CPU. It still has plenty of memory available when it hangs.
Please provide any additional information below. Attach a screenshot if possible.
This was OK in r9060. 10MB is still OK with r9229.
URL:http://josm.openstreetmap.de/svn/trunk Repository:UUID: 0c6e7542-c601-0410-84e7-c038aed88b3b Last:Changed Date: 2015-12-31 13:54:58 +0100 (Thu, 31 Dec 2015) Build-Date:2015-12-31 12:57:00 Revision:9229 Relative:URL: ^/trunk Identification: JOSM/1.5 (9229 en) Mac OS X 10.9.5 Memory Usage: 218 MB / 3641 MB (94 MB allocated, but free) Java version: 1.8.0_66, Oracle Corporation, Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM
Attachments (0)
Change History (17)
comment:1 by , 9 years ago
follow-up: 3 comment:2 by , 9 years ago
I have no problem to open http://download.geofabrik.de/europe/azores-latest.osm.bz2 (116 Mb after extraction)
comment:3 by , 9 years ago
Replying to Don-vip:
I have no problem to open http://download.geofabrik.de/europe/azores-latest.osm.bz2 (116 Mb after extraction)
http://www.overpass-api.de/api/xapi?map?bbox=3.44,43.26,3.54,43.33
comment:4 by , 9 years ago
I can reproduce (the benchmark output is enabled w/ mappaint.render.benchmark
):
INFO: Open file: /tmp/xapi.osm (65363254 bytes) -- the file containing http://www.overpass-api.de/api/xapi?map?bbox=3.44,43.26,3.54,43.33 INFO: Undefined element 'note' found in input stream. Skipping. INFO: Undefined element 'meta' found in input stream. Skipping. BENCHMARK: rendering phase 1 (calculate styles): 1 min 50 s; phase 2 (draw): 2.1 s; total: 1 min 52 s (scale: 1759.0249065781031 zoom level: 13)
The rendering takes 2 minutes and JOSM is unresponsive in the meanwhile
Build-Date:2016-01-03 12:36:12 Revision:9274 Is-Local-Build:true Identification: JOSM/1.5 (9274 SVN en) Linux Arch Linux Memory Usage: 362 MB / 3504 MB (303 MB allocated, but free) Java version: 1.8.0_66, Oracle Corporation, OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM
CPU i5-2500K, no separate GPU, 16GB of RAM
comment:5 by , 9 years ago
Testing w/ r9060:
INFO: Open file: /tmp/xapi.osm (65363254 bytes) BENCHMARK: rendering phase 1 (calculate styles): 2.7 s; phase 2 (draw): 2.5 s; total: 5.2 s (scale: 1785.7104575785763 zoom level: 13)
comment:6 by , 9 years ago
Keywords: | regression added |
---|---|
Milestone: | → 16.01 |
Priority: | normal → critical |
comment:7 by , 9 years ago
Cc: | added |
---|
comment:8 by , 9 years ago
Keywords: | performance added |
---|
comment:9 by , 9 years ago
I don't know whether this is relevant, but the bulk of the data in my xapi extract is buildings (imported from the French Cadastre, so a large part of France would be the same).
comment:10 by , 9 years ago
Component: | Core → Core mappaint |
---|---|
Keywords: | partial fill added |
comment:11 by , 9 years ago
I can confirm that the workaround for this issue is to turn off the partial fill option in the mappaint style.
There is also a large number of overlapping landuses in my extract.
follow-up: 15 comment:13 by , 9 years ago
This bug broke the intern cache in StyleCache
, i.e. it piles up more and more equal objects. This causes a memory leak and apparently slows down JOSM.
I'm not sure what the consequences are for the normal user, but it certainly isn't nice to have this bug in a tested version.
comment:14 by , 9 years ago
Cc: | added |
---|
follow-up: 16 comment:15 by , 9 years ago
Replying to bastiK:
I'm not sure what the consequences are for the normal user, but it certainly isn't nice to have this bug in a tested version.
Do you think we should begin stabilization? We can release 16.01 earlier and delay unstarted stuff to 16.02.
comment:16 by , 9 years ago
Replying to Don-vip:
Replying to bastiK:
I'm not sure what the consequences are for the normal user, but it certainly isn't nice to have this bug in a tested version.
Do you think we should begin stabilization? We can release 16.01 earlier and delay unstarted stuff to 16.02.
It gets continuously worse (slower) during a session, when more data is loaded and displayed. I think it would be good to make a very early release now. Besides, we already have a few visible changes this year. :)
can you please share your file?