You are here

Vista and XP Testers Requested

13 posts / 0 new
Last post
wraithdu
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 7 months ago
Developer
Joined: 2007-06-27 20:22
Vista and XP Testers Requested

I think there's some performance issues with the NSIS System plugin and Windows Vista.

I really need Vista testers for this, but some XP machines are needed also as a baseline.

If you would like to help my testing, please download the zip file, and run each EXE. It should popup a dialog box in 10-20 seconds. During this time, could you open Task Manager and watch the CPU usage for the executable. Please report back the EXE you ran, the average CPU usage, and the time elapsed (from the dialog).

And would the Vista testers also say whether or not you have UAC on or off.

Thanks!!

Download

ZachHudock
ZachHudock's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 6 days ago
Developer
Joined: 2006-12-06 18:07
XP Pro with

XP Pro with SP2:

ProcessWaitTEST_admin.exe Time: 12 seconds CPU: 17

ProcessWaitTEST_user.exe Time: 12 seconds CPU: 19

The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705

John Bentley
John Bentley's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 years 5 months ago
Developer
Joined: 2006-01-24 13:26
Windows Vista Home

Windows Vista Home Premium SP1 UAC on

user.exe = ~10/9%, time = 12
admin.exe = ~10/9%, time = 13

cowsay Moo
cowthink 'Dude, why are you staring at me.'

someoneabc
Offline
Last seen: 13 years 5 months ago
Joined: 2007-04-05 12:34
Results

XP Home - SP2:

admin.exe - 10 secs, 5-6% CPU

user.exe - 10 secs, 5-6% CPU

Aciago
Aciago's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 2007-01-24 14:23
.

Windows Vista Home Premium x32 SP1 UAC on
user.exe = from 5 trough 10, time = 11
admin.exe = from 6 trough 9, time = 11

Include Real Time Protection from Spyware Terminator annoying (as always) asking if I want to run the file and taking precious time to check the task manager... Wink

If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port,
and the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
and the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort,
then the socket packet pocket has an error to report Biggrin

Patrick Patience
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 month ago
DeveloperModerator
Joined: 2007-02-20 19:26
Windows XP Professional SP2

On Windows XP Professional SP2

ProcessWaitTEST_admin.exe:
Time: 11 seconds
CPU: 5-6

ProcessWaitTEST_user.exe:
Time: 11 seconds
CPU: 5-6

wraithdu
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 7 months ago
Developer
Joined: 2007-06-27 20:22
Thanks everyone who tested

Thanks everyone who tested so far!!

Could you please re-download and run the same tests one more time? I tweaked the loop down to 500ms. This first tests were at 250ms to get a high end.

I figured out what was causing issue on my end. If you don't include RequestExecutionLevel (doesn't matter if it's user or admin) then CPU usage is over double (!!) in Vista. This is the problem I was seeing, so thanks again for sorting it. Just need to see how much better a 500ms loop is so I can decide on a default.

Bruce Pascoe
Offline
Last seen: 11 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2006-01-15 16:14
RequestExecutionLevel

That actually makes some sense, as without a RequestExecutionLevel (Vista's cue that the app is Vista-ready) under UAC, the app runs in compatibility mode: writes to Program Files or HKLM are virtualized to point somewhere in %USERPROFILE% or HKCU, respectively (such writes would just fail with RequestExecutionLevel user in play). I'm sure other stuff is emulated, too.

Try turning UAC off and testing without RequestExecutionLevel. See if CPU usage goes down. If it does, then you have your answer.

wraithdu
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 7 months ago
Developer
Joined: 2007-06-27 20:22
Nope, CPU usage is through

Nope, CPU usage is through the roof regardless of UAC (I have it turned off on my laptop). My only guess is that without that option explicitly set, then for each system call Vista has to decide what to do with it, before checking the status of UAC. Even though NSIS is recognized by Vista and given the appropriate rights (elevated to admin I believe), this decision making process must take a lot of computations. Setting that value, whether user or admin, takes the decision out of Vista's hands, saving a lot of CPU.

But you're right, you'd think turning off UAC would aleviate the problem. No such luck.

Patrick Patience
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 month ago
DeveloperModerator
Joined: 2007-02-20 19:26
Windows XP Professional SP2 - Test 2

On Windows XP Professional SP2 - Test 2

ProcessWaitTEST_admin.exe:
Time: 10 seconds
CPU: 2-4

ProcessWaitTEST_user.exe:
Time: 10 seconds
CPU: 2-4

millarrp
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 3 months ago
Joined: 2007-03-02 13:43
Vista Ultimate SP2

User: Usage 7 to 15 Elapsed Time 11
Admin: Usage 6 to 16 Elapsed Time 10

John Bentley
John Bentley's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 years 5 months ago
Developer
Joined: 2006-01-24 13:26
Vista HP SP1 UAC on User and

Vista HP SP1 UAC on

User and Admin both = [3-6%, 11]

cowsay Moo
cowthink 'Dude, why are you staring at me.'

Aciago
Aciago's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 2007-01-24 14:23
test 2

Windows Vista Home Premium x32 SP1 UAC on
user.exe = 2-10%, time = 11
admin.exe = 4-5%, time = 10

As usual... Include Real Time Protection from Spyware Terminator annoying (as always) asking if I want to run the file and taking precious time to check the task manager...

If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port,
and the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
and the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort,
then the socket packet pocket has an error to report Biggrin

Log in or register to post comments