You are not logged in.

#1 2010-12-06 07:28:58

thinkpadx61
Member
From: Norway
Registered: 2010-12-03
Posts: 10

urxvt + mplayer = high cpu usage

Urxvt takes up 14-17% of the cpu while running mplayer, which is pretty high considering that it will use less than or equal to 1% normally. The strange thing is that when I hide/background the "mplayer urxvt window" inside a gnu screen the usage will go back to less than or equal to 1%.

This is not a problem in other terminal emulators, btw. Tested in xterm and aterm.

Any ideas to what might cause this?

rxvt-unicode (urxvt) v9.07 - released: 2009-12-27
MPlayer SVN-r32663-4.5.1

# mplayer.conf
ao="alsa"
subfont-text-scale=3
subfont-osd-scale=3
nolirc=yes

[gnome-mplayer]
msglevel=all=5

Last edited by thinkpadx61 (2010-12-06 08:19:07)

Offline

#2 2010-12-06 14:47:01

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,440

Re: urxvt + mplayer = high cpu usage

Is mplayer constantly writing sth to that urxvt window? I can reproduce it when urxvt tries to emulate 'the matrix' and produces hundreds of lines of info about alignment / sync, "to many buffered ptys" etc.
Try to quiet down mplayer.

Offline

#3 2010-12-06 15:10:53

thinkpadx61
Member
From: Norway
Registered: 2010-12-03
Posts: 10

Re: urxvt + mplayer = high cpu usage

Well, the following line is active:
A: 718.3 V: 718.3 A-V:  0.000 ct: -0.033 21527/21527  4%  0%  0.6% 5 0

Will this make urxvt take up so much resources? I can't recall this having been a problem in the past ...

Offline

#4 2010-12-06 15:55:16

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,440

Re: urxvt + mplayer = high cpu usage

urxvt behaves similarly (gets resource-hungry) when I download a bunch of small files with wget and I get hundreds of:

--2010-12-06 16:45:20--  http://lh4.ggpht.com/_brSr6vlEcEo/TPa9Doc3gKI/AAAAAAAAAXI/vt9DOQSSoT4/s576/100_4523.JPG
Reusing existing connection to lh5.ggpht.com:80.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 83948 (82K) [image/jpeg]
Saving to: `/home/karol/s5/100_4523.JPG'

100%[=============================================================================>] 83.948       295K/s   in 0,3s 

Next time I'll try xterm to see if there's any difference.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB