LabVIEW
LabVIEW Environment, Editor and Configuration Windows are very slow.
Solved!
I have an issue with my LabVIEW editor. It slows down to a great extent when working in any kind of project. We're talking small projects, or big projects. With SubVIs of an average size of 200kb and code complexity of ~0.5, not more than 1.
The current project I have contains about 32 SubVIs and 10 controls.
Opening the Icon Editor, Options, Enum Options, Control Windows to change the configuration of something is really, really sluggish. It's very often that they freeze, and I usually experience a ~20 second lag on average.
I'm using LabVIEW 17.0. These are the main computer specs:
I can't really change my computer, so I'm trying to do anything I can to help speed up the editor. I've disabled Live Wire updates in the ini, but that didn't really help with the issue.
Any advice is appreciated.
Edit: I forgot to mention this but. The sluggishness of the editor is not consistent.
The block diagram is the "fastest" of the bunch. Then for example, the project or VI properties window, followed by the event structure window, control window. Which are still slow.
Then the Enum properties window is much, much slower with more freezes. Followed by the icon editor, being the slowest of them all, with the longest lags and freezes.
Task manager shows the process jump from 9% usage with no VIs open to 32% to 50% where it stays, despite frequent freezes.
- Is the computer otherwise fast?
- Is a windows update in progress? (Maybe it never finishes due to some other problem)
- Have you rebooted recently?
- Are the drives really full?
- Did you check your drives for errors?
- Did you try to see if there are updated video drivers?
- Are you running any unusual security software?
- Did you scan the PC for malware?
- Any exclamation marks in the device manager?
- How is the CPU use in task manager?
- Is the computer healthy (fans running fine etc.) It will reduce the speed when overheating.
- ...
8 GB of memory isn't even enough to run WinXP with authority. I'm guessing your PC is doing HUGE amounts of memory to disk any time you try to do much of anything.
@billko wrote:
8 GB of memory isn't even enough to run WinXP with authority. I'm guessing your PC is doing HUGE amounts of memory to disk any time you try to do much of anything.
8GB is fine for almost everything! You can see in the task manager how much is actually used.
(Just make sure you don't have 200 browser windows open. On modern browsers, each browser tab/window typically runs in a separate process for performance and security)
(Windows XP was 32bit in 99% of installations and could not even support more than 4GB! (Yes, there was also an oddball 64bit version with limited driver support))
@altenbach wrote:
@billko wrote:
8 GB of memory isn't even enough to run WinXP with authority. I'm guessing your PC is doing HUGE amounts of memory to disk any time you try to do much of anything.
8GB is fine for almost everything! You can see in the task manager how much is actually used.
(Just make sure you don't have 200 browser windows open. On modern browsers, each browser tab/window typically runs in a separate process for performance and security)
(Windows XP was 32bit in 99% of installations and could not even support more than 4GB! (Yes, there was also an oddball 64bit version with limited driver support))
I don't know. Everything I've read (and everything I've experienced) seems to indicate that 8GB is the bare minimum amount of memory you want to have if you want a reasonable experience.
But you're right about WinXP. Being that it was (mostly commonly) 32-bit, it couldn't even make use of memory above the 4GB limit. I don't know what I was thinking of there.
I will stand by my assessment that 8GB is on the edge of performance, though. My computer at work right now, not doing anything, is using just a bit under 8GB of active memory.
I have run LabVIEW on 2GB of RAM. It's no longer like in the last century, where free ram is desirable. Unused ram is useless, so applications squat and use as much as they can get, even the OS for disk caching. I bet your exact system would show significantly less memory usage if you had less memory. 🙂
@billko wrote:
I don't know. Everything I've read (and everything I've experienced) seems to indicate that 8GB is the bare minimum amount of memory you want to have if you want a reasonable experience.
But you're right about WinXP. Being that it was (mostly commonly) 32-bit, it couldn't even make use of memory above the 4GB limit. I don't know what I was thinking of there.
I will stand by my assessment that 8GB is on the edge of performance, though. My computer at work right now, not doing anything, is using just a bit under 8GB of active memory.
Memory usage in Win10 is trickier than before. Windows uses free memory to improve performance, so it's not as easy as "see free memory" anymore. But, as the Paged pool is small, all useful data is in memory.
