Hi, On Sat, Oct 13, 2007 at 07:58:41PM +0200, Matthias Franz wrote:
Hi,
I've started comparing the xtraces of dillo1 and dillo2 during scrolling a long, _empty_ page (just 100 times "<br>").
The dillo2 trace contains the request
000:<:0392: 28: Request(62): CopyArea src-drawable=0x00a0000a dst-drawable=0x00a0000a gc=0x00a0000b src-x=0 src-y=74 dst-x=0 dst-y=73 width=1009 height=631
(A similar line appears in the previous traces of Johannes and mine.)
For dillo1, I get
000:<:05b6: 28: Request(62): CopyArea src-drawable=0x00a00087 dst-drawable=0x00a0006d gc=0x00a00008 src-x=0 src-y=645 dst-x=0 dst-y=645 width=990 height=10
I don't have a detailed understanding of what's going on, but I find the difference in the "height" parameter remarkable. It seems that dillo2 copies an area - roughly the whole screen - which is 60 (!) times larger than that copied by dillo1. 60 could also be the performance difference we observe.
That's interesting. dillo2 (with patch) scrolls by copying the screen content that was visible before scrolling and still is after scrolling. So the large CopyArea is expected. Then any freshly exposed area is redrawn from scratch. dillo1 / gtk1 seems to have a more optimized way of doing that, that does not need to copy that much of the screen. There is a link in the gtk code to this document: http://www.gtk.org/~otaylor/whitepapers/guffaw-scrolling.txt which might be related. Cheers, Johannes
Cheers, -- Matthias Franz
_______________________________________________ Dillo-dev mailing list Dillo-dev@dillo.org http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev