Sametime memory consumption
by Volker Weber
Here are three screenshots of memory consumption. The first one is for AdiumX on the Mac, the next two ones are for Sametime 7.51 which runs two processes. AdiumX is connected to AOL Instant Messenger, ICQ, GoogleTalk, Jabber, MSN, Yahoo Messenger and the IBM Sametime Demo server at stdemo3.dfw.ibm.com. Sametime 7.5.1 is connected to the IBM Sametime Demo server at stdemo3.dfw.ibm.com only. Both programs are idling at around 2% CPU consumption. Sametime's buddy list contains four contacts, Adium has a few hundred. Both Adium and Sametime have no additional plugins installed.
Comments
Ouch!
Volker, what's your ST7.5.1 performance been like, compared to Adium or Skype for example? My experience is that I am getting the whirly beachball everytime I click anywhere in Sametime, and the response to any kind of action is very very lagged. This is true on both my Powerbook and Intel Mac.
Certainly compared to the snappy performance of 7.5.1 on my aged Thinkpad, there is a very wide difference in usability.
The Macbook has 2 GB of memory, so I may not be having as many page faults as you have. If you get the beachball all the time I suggest that parts of Sametime are being swapped in from disk and this release is clearly not for you. It will be interesting to see how many people tolerate a fat IM client.
Perhaps the most worrying behaviour I have seen so far with 7.5.1 on Mac is that you can be in the midst of a chat and occasionally here the 'beep' of a message arriving without it actually displaying. The only way to see the missing text is to close the chat window and reopen it. Feels like beta code to me.
I have the same problem with messages not displaying using 7.5.1 on windows. I thought it was something to do with the new tabbed interface but I turned that off I still have the problem.
I’m pretty certain that missing message issue is to do with tabs: I had the same thing happening to me in 7.5.1. When I switched off the tabbed interface it went away. Nasty wee bug that one!
I really thought I did see it without using the tabs (the day I switched from using tabs to not using tabs). I have not seen the problem again and therefore was incorrect and the problem only exists when using the tabs.
