[racket] Package installation VERY SLOW

Hi Neil,

Thanks for responding.  I do want to emphasize that my comments
weren't meant to pick on you specifically: your CSV package happened
to be the one I had just been installing so it was on my mind when I
wrote the original message.  

I do appreciate the work that went into making the packages and I use
a few of yours extensively.


On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 06:43:13 -0400, Neil Van Dyke
<neil at neilvandyke.org> wrote:

>FWIW, I just tried Racket 6.1 installing PLaneT "neil/csv:1:7", and two 
>observations:
>
>* I don't immediately know why, but my Racket 6.1 (command-line 
>"racket", and DrRacket) doesn't build the documentation when installing 
>the PLaneT package.  I can't look into this right now.

I wasn't able to install on 6.1 at all.  With 6.1, right from the
start I experienced problems with Racket locking up - completely
unresponsive, 0% CPU use - and after half a day trying to get it
working I gave up.


>* The performance looks fine, for not building the documentation. (This 
>is on a 6+ year-old 32-bit x86 GNU/Linux laptop with slow spinning hard 
>drive, running a Racket I built from source.)
>
>I haven't played with Racket 6.x much, since the main project I'm 
>working on right now is still using Racket 5.3.4 (with Ryan's essential 
>PostgreSQL SSL patch).

Your times for 1:7 are in line with what I'm seeing ... a bit less
than 20 minutes for first install.  2:0 takes well over an hour.
However I'm on a fairly new i7 with 12GB of RAM and a fast disk.  I am
using Windows rather than Linux/Unix.

I have had this experience with every package that includes integrated
documentation - whether a fresh download from PLaneT or imported into
6.0.1 from 5.3.4. Things that take minutes to install on 5.3.4 take
10s of minutes on 6.0.1.

Also, I have tried both 32-bit and 64-bit Racket.  The behavior is
roughly the same - throwing more memory at it with 64-bit doesn't seem
to make any difference.  CPU usage varies, but is rarely over 30%.

Once packages are successfully installed, there is no problem using
them.  Subjectively the 6.0.1 GUI feels to me to be slower than 5.3.4
GUI, but programs run acceptably fast and when run from the command
line programs actually seem to be a hair faster.


>Neil V.
George