[gs-bugs] [Bug 691914] New: gs 9 is 10 X slower than gs 8.71 with DEVICE=epswrite
bugzilla-daemon at ghostscript.com
bugzilla-daemon at ghostscript.com
Fri Jan 28 03:22:37 UTC 2011
http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691914
Summary: gs 9 is 10 X slower than gs 8.71 with DEVICE=epswrite
Product: Ghostscript
Version: 9.00
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P4
Component: PS Writer
AssignedTo: ken.sharp at artifex.com
ReportedBy: williambader at hotmail.com
QAContact: gs-bugs at ghostscript.com
Estimated Hours: 0.0
gs 9 is TEN times slower than gs 8.71 and generates an eps file that is almost
5 times larger.
I have a script that converts PDF files to EPS files. It ran in an acceptable
time with gs 8.71, but it began taking too long when I updated to gs 9. I
tracked it to some PDF files that now take much longer. I had to revert to gs
8.71.
I have some tests with a representative PDF file. The file is black and white,
so I think that the ICC changes shouldn't be an issue.
The time with the ppmraw device is about the same from 8.71 to 9, so I suspect
that the problem is with epswrite rather than another component of gs or how I
did the build.
When I add -r600, gs9 is almost 15 times slower than gs 8.71. Did something
change with the way that gs writes bitmaps?
William
gs 9 is over 10 times slower converting a PDF to an EPS with epswrite, and the
resulting eps is almost five times as large.
$ /usr/bin/gs -v
GPL Ghostscript 8.71 (2010-02-10)
Copyright (C) 2010 Artifex Software, Inc. All rights reserved.
$ /usr/local/bin/gs -v
GPL Ghostscript SVN PRE-RELEASE 9.01 (2010-09-14)
Copyright (C) 2010 Artifex Software, Inc. All rights reserved.
$ time /usr/bin/gs -q -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE -dEPSCrop -sDEVICE=epswrite
-sOutputFile=temp0.eps 601.PDF
real 0m0.902s
user 0m0.827s
sys 0m0.074s
$ time /usr/local/bin/gs -q -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE -dEPSCrop -sDEVICE=epswrite
-sOutputFile=temp1.eps 601.PDF
real 0m11.786s
user 0m11.606s
sys 0m0.118s
$ ls -l temp0.eps temp1.eps
-rw-rw-rw- 1 william william 10253829 Jan 28 03:39 temp0.eps
-rw-rw-rw- 1 william william 47436513 Jan 28 03:39 temp1.eps
The times are about the same with the ppmraw device.
$ time /usr/bin/gs -r600 -q -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE -dEPSCrop -sDEVICE=ppmraw
-sOutputFile=temp0.ppm 601.PDF
real 0m3.762s
user 0m1.075s
sys 0m0.510s
$ time /usr/local/bin/gs -r600 -q -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE -dEPSCrop -sDEVICE=ppmraw
-sOutputFile=temp1.ppm 601.PDF
real 0m3.725s
user 0m1.096s
sys 0m0.507s
$ ls -l temp0.ppm temp1.ppm
-rw-rw-rw- 1 william william 261439559 Jan 28 03:54 temp0.ppm
-rw-rw-rw- 1 william william 261439575 Jan 28 03:55 temp1.ppm
For epswrite, adding -r600 makes epswrite slightly faster with gs 8.71 and
slightly slower with gs 9, so gs 9 is almost 15 times slower.
$ time /usr/bin/gs -r600 -q -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE -dEPSCrop -sDEVICE=epswrite
-sOutputFile=temp0a.eps 601.PDF
real 0m0.825s
user 0m0.754s
sys 0m0.070s
$ time /usr/local/bin/gs -r600 -q -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE -dEPSCrop -sDEVICE=epswrite
-sOutputFile=temp1a.eps 601.PDF
real 0m11.792s
user 0m11.462s
sys 0m0.156s
$ ls -l temp0a.eps temp1a.eps
-rw-rw-rw- 1 william william 9833131 Jan 28 03:58 temp0a.eps
-rw-rw-rw- 1 william william 46612187 Jan 28 03:59 temp1a.eps
I tested with a gs9.01 pre-release, but gs9.00 has the same performance issue.
$ /usr/local/bin/gs900 -v
GPL Ghostscript 9.00 (2010-09-14)
Copyright (C) 2010 Artifex Software, Inc. All rights reserved.
$ time /usr/local/bin/gs900 -r600 -q -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE -dEPSCrop
-sDEVICE=epswrite -sOutputFile=temp1a.eps 601.PDF
real 0m12.180s
user 0m11.831s
sys 0m0.232s
pdftops from poppler processes this file faster than gs 8.71 and produces a
smaller file, so I do not think that this PDF does anything especially
expensive.
$ pdftops -v
pdftops version 0.15.3
Copyright 2005-2010 The Poppler Developers - http://poppler.freedesktop.org
Copyright 1996-2004 Glyph & Cog, LLC
$ time pdftops -eps 601.PDF temp2.eps
real 0m0.503s
user 0m0.480s
sys 0m0.023s
$ ls -l temp2.eps
-rw-rw-rw- 1 william william 3343585 Jan 28 04:16 temp2.eps
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ghostscript.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
More information about the gs-bugs
mailing list