Jump to content


Photo

RM4 seems to take quite a long time to open


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 Brenda Hare

Brenda Hare

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 13 September 2009 - 12:40 PM

I suppose it's not fair to keep comparing RMv4 to my old (much loved) Family Origins v8.

I still have FO v8 on my computer, as I just can't pull myself away from it quite yet. I also have RM v4 installed on the same machine.

I just opened both FO and RM to make some updates to information, after returning from a research trip.

FO v8 opens in an instant, yet RM v4 sits there and grinds away, taking quite a bit longer to open.

I have noticed this many times in the past, and wanted to bring that subject up, as it seems a bit "strange" that the newer software takes so much longer to load.

And no, I have the same number of individuals, marriages, events, etc, in both databases. My FO is my main database, and I keep using that database to recreate the one used with RM v4.

Brenda

#2 John_of_Ross_County

John_of_Ross_County

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 663 posts

Posted 13 September 2009 - 11:14 PM

I suppose it's not fair to keep comparing RMv4 to my old (much loved) Family Origins v8.

I still have FO v8 on my computer, as I just can't pull myself away from it quite yet. I also have RM v4 installed on the same machine.

I just opened both FO and RM to make some updates to information, after returning from a research trip.

FO v8 opens in an instant, yet RM v4 sits there and grinds away, taking quite a bit longer to open.

I have noticed this many times in the past, and wanted to bring that subject up, as it seems a bit "strange" that the newer software takes so much longer to load.

And no, I have the same number of individuals, marriages, events, etc, in both databases. My FO is my main database, and I keep using that database to recreate the one used with RM v4.

Brenda

I wonder if your computer is the same one used when Family Origins Ver 8 was released. I was using Windows 98 2nd edition with FO-8 and that seems like a long time ago. Note that Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Vista are on the official supported list for the new RM4 release.

I am currently using a Windows 2000 system with 256 mB of memory. RM3 is faster to load than RM4. Both were active within 15 seconds. But I had e-mail and Internet Explorer active and Norton was loading the new virus signature. All of that is too much for an 8 year old system with limited memory. RootsMagic performs better on this system without a web connection and without Norton using CPU cycles to load signatures or to scan files.

#3 Brenda Hare

Brenda Hare

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 14 September 2009 - 09:11 AM

I wonder if your computer is the same one used when Family Origins Ver 8 was released. I was using Windows 98 2nd edition with FO-8 and that seems like a long time ago. Note that Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Vista are on the official supported list for the new RM4 release.

I am currently using a Windows 2000 system with 256 mB of memory. RM3 is faster to load than RM4. Both were active within 15 seconds. But I had e-mail and Internet Explorer active and Norton was loading the new virus signature. All of that is too much for an 8 year old system with limited memory. RootsMagic performs better on this system without a web connection and without Norton using CPU cycles to load signatures or to scan files.


My computer is about 3 years old. I realize it's not the newest of all machines, but it's running Win XP Pro and has 2 - 500 gig hard drives and 4 gig memory. I have RM3, but quite honestly, never used it. Well, I shouldn't say NEVER, but hardly never. I found myself always reverting back to FO v8, probably because it was familiar, and I knew where to do everything, and how to do everything.

When the upgrade from RM3 to RM4 came along, I bought the upgrade to RM4, "just to keep up with the rest of the world" and am attempting to FORCE myself to use it, because I think I will like it, *if* I can drag myself away from FO8.

I shouldn't complain about the time it takes to open RM4, but it's a lot longer than FO8.

Oh - and I don't use Norton, either. I used to, on my last computer, but Norton kept turning itself off about every other day, for whatever reason, and it was taking me about half an hour a day to get it running again, and making sure it was going to stay running. Just not worth the trouble to me. Now I use AVAST, which is a free virus protection, AND best of all, is maintenance free. It updates automatically, and has never turned itself off.

Brenda

#4 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3427 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 10:00 AM

When the upgrade from RM3 to RM4 came along, I bought the upgrade to RM4, "just to keep up with the rest of the world" and am attempting to FORCE myself to use it, because I think I will like it, *if* I can drag myself away from FO8.

Brenda, you are quite right about the time it takes for RM4 to open especially on first load and of course more noticable on larger databases. I have both RM3 and RM4 installed, RM3 opens almost instantly and RM4 can 15 or more seconds while it is "building indexes" and I also have a modern machine.

Problem is this has never been recognised as an issue so I am not sure if it is being worked on or will improve in the future? :(

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.2, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#5 Brenda Hare

Brenda Hare

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 12:01 PM

Brenda, you are quite right about the time it takes for RM4 to open especially on first load and of course more noticable on larger databases. I have both RM3 and RM4 installed, RM3 opens almost instantly and RM4 can 15 or more seconds while it is "building indexes" and I also have a modern machine.

Problem is this has never been recognised as an issue so I am not sure if it is being worked on or will improve in the future? :(


I am hoping that the makers of RM are reading this, and realize that it *is* an issue... My Family Origins v8 opens INSTANTLY. It makes me keep using FO, because as old as that software is, it works, and doesn't take any time at all to open. The time taken to open RM4 will make me seriously consider not purchasing another upgrade.

#6 Romer

Romer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2073 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 12:34 PM

Brenda,

How large is your database? Some people who have very large databases have reported a similar problem. I have just several thousand individuals in mine and have been fortunate not to experience any problems whatsoever.

The developers had asked for feedback on response time, so it was apparently being looked at.

#7 John_of_Ross_County

John_of_Ross_County

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 663 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 02:28 PM

Brenda,

How large is your database? Some people who have very large databases have reported a similar problem. I have just several thousand individuals in mine and have been fortunate not to experience any problems whatsoever.

The developers had asked for feedback on response time, so it was apparently being looked at.


It is not my intent to start an endless list of "my database is larger than yours" etc. But on a dated 8 year old Windows 2000 system with just 256 mB, here are some time tests. Quiet system, no internet connection, no Norton
18420 people in database, fresh copy from RM3 to new file in RM4

RM4 time from clicking on icon to first screen 9 sec, 4 sec, 5 sec, 5 sec
Backup time 3 sec, 3 sec

RM3 time from clicking on icon to first screen 6 sec, 2 sec, 2 sec
Backup time 12 sec

As I mentioned months ago, I am willing to bet that faster times on successive time trials for RM3 reflect cache memory performance. The difference between versions 3 and 4 for this database is relatively minor and not worth debating.

#8 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3459 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 04:16 PM

It also helps to understand that versions prior to RM 4 operated upon a database divided amongst about a dozen files (and their associated index files) which allowed the flexibility of only loading certain portions of the database, initially, and avoiding calls to others that contained fields less frequently used or modified until required later. This all-in-one database file and the enhanced program features simply operates in a different scope. Put your thinking caps on for a second and ask yourselves a simple question -> If Bruce could "so easily" speed up the program, don't you think he would? ;)

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#9 Brenda Hare

Brenda Hare

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 04:37 PM

It also helps to understand that versions prior to RM 4 operated upon a database divided amongst about a dozen files (and their associated index files) which allowed the flexibility of only loading certain portions of the database, initially, and avoiding calls to others that contained fields less frequently used or modified until required later. This all-in-one database file and the enhanced program features simply operates in a different scope. Put your thinking caps on for a second and ask yourselves a simple question -> If Bruce could "so easily" speed up the program, don't you think he would? ;)


I do realize that the FO database, and earlier versions of RM had their databases divided up among quite a few files, making the process load faster. And I do realize that RM4 does have just one file, which makes it load slower.

Bruce may not realize that users notice the time it takes RM4 to load. Hopefully he is reading this and realize that we do want the program to load faster. Is there an ADVANTAGE to having the database as one large file? I have in excess of 30,000 individuals in my database, as I have been researching for the best part of 30 years. And yes, I do realize that the average user probably does *not* have that many individuals in their database, but I'm sorry --- I do.

Brenda

#10 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3427 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 06:24 PM

On the first load of RM4 from a cold booted machine the wait for the indexing to complete can be painfully slow even on fairly modern computers. Any subsequent load will be very fast by comparison as a lot of the necessary information is already cached. Even if you have loaded the database quickly on the second or third session, try doing File > Properties and you will also notice a considerable wait on the first execution.

Make sure your Sidebar is open and on the index tab and you will see the when the Index finally appears and RM is ready to go.

Both these tests were done on the same database from a cold boot then the subsequent (second) load of the same database, no disk indexing or anything other than McAfee was running in the background.

My database = People 58898, Families 23101, Events 124919

Machine #1 (average speed desktop)
Intel E6400 (core 2), 2.13ghz, 3GB ram, 10K rpm Raptor HDD’s, Win XP Pro SP3
Time to first load RM database = 38 seconds
Subsequent loads = ~2 seconds


Machine #2 (3 year old laptop)
Intel Pentium M, 1.73GHZ, 2 GB ram, Win XP Pro SP3
Time to first load RM database = 57 seconds
Subsequent loads = ~3 seconds

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.2, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#11 Brenda Hare

Brenda Hare

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 06:31 PM

Thanks much for the information. I had just opened RM4 on the one computer, just once, and then went back to Family Origins, because the initial open of RM4 was so painfully slow (not as bad as your 38 seconds, but not that far off.) I'll start using it, since it sounds like it isn't going to take that long on each load.

>>Make sure your Sidebar is open and on the index tab and you will see the when the Index finally appears and RM is ready to go.

How do I open the Sidebar, in case I have somehow managed to close it?

Thank you,
Brenda

#12 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3427 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 06:56 PM

How do I open the Sidebar, in case I have somehow managed to close it?

On the leftmost edge of the screen you will see a little arrow pointing in > - click it and the Sidebar will appear. Along the top you have various tabs fro Index, Family, Groups etc.

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.2, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#13 Romer

Romer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2073 posts

Posted 16 September 2009 - 09:54 AM

View > Sidebar (or [Alt]+V then S) will also get you there.

#14 Brenda Hare

Brenda Hare

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 16 September 2009 - 11:13 AM

View > Sidebar (or [Alt]+V then S) will also get you there.


Thank you both very much. I did have it closed.

Brenda

#15 n4ehv

n4ehv

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 16 September 2009 - 12:32 PM

I also have the same problem that Brenda Hare has. Which is why I am not going to upgrade till that is solved. I'll stay with RM3. 89,000 people take too long to index with 2,500 pictures all I do is wait.

#16 Brenda Hare

Brenda Hare

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 16 September 2009 - 12:36 PM

I also have the same problem that Brenda Hare has. Which is why I am not going to upgrade till that is solved. I'll stay with RM3. 89,000 people take too long to index with 2,500 pictures all I do is wait.


I bought RM3 and then upgraded to RM4, but quite honestly, I'm not using RM4 because of the glitches that I have had with it, AND with the time it takes to open.

I am still using Family Origins v8, which is the latest version I purchased. Makes me wish I would have bought FO v10 when it was available. I still like that program, and quite honestly, can't see anything that RM does, that FO doesn't do. Maybe I'm overlooking something.

Brenda

#17 Romer

Romer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2073 posts

Posted 16 September 2009 - 01:04 PM

As mentioned in the other thread ( http://www.rootsmagi...-view-question/ ), a large number of new features have been added in just going from RM3 to RM4, much less from a version of FO.

I suspect that you're just staying within your comfort level as far as working within RM4 is concerned and not really trying to explore much beyond the features that you were familiar with in FO. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, and if that's the case, there's really no reason to feel compelled to use RM4 if you don't want or need any of the features that have been developed over the years. Previous versions of RM and FO were solid works of software and can be used without apology.

#18 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3459 posts

Posted 16 September 2009 - 03:00 PM

and quite honestly, can't see anything that RM does, that FO doesn't do. Maybe I'm overlooking something.


How do I open the Sidebar, in case I have somehow managed to close it?

:)

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#19 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3427 posts

Posted 16 September 2009 - 04:46 PM

I bought RM3 and then upgraded to RM4, but quite honestly, I'm not using RM4 because of the glitches that I have had with it, AND with the time it takes to open.

It's true that RM4 still has many "glitches" to be ironed out, most of the new enhancements have one problem or another which seem to be proving difficult to correct.

However the differences between what you can do with RM4 as opposed to RM3 are considerable never mind FO8. I just wish I could do all these things and get on with genealogy instead of working round problems and "glitches". Hopefully that day is not too far away.

See the summary of new features released March 4, 2009 at http://blog.rootsmagic.com/?m=200903 and check the blog archives from July 2008 to end of 08 for explanations of the new features in RM4.

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.2, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#20 Brenda Hare

Brenda Hare

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 16 September 2009 - 04:50 PM

See the summary of new features released March 4, 2009 at http://blog.rootsmagic.com/?m=200903 and check the blog archives from July 2008 to end of 08 for explanations of the new features in RM4.


Thanks MUCH. I will check out the new features explanation. I have been wondering, quite honestly, what the differences between FO8 and RM3 or RM4 really are.

I guess I have been tending to just keep doing "the same old things" that I was comfortable with, in RM4, but when RM4 froze up my machine, because it was trying to get me to log into the new LDS site (which non-LDS members don't have access to)... I was afraid to try anything else. I couldn't get out of that little glitch... I had to just turn my machine out. The Task Manager didn't even close RM4. (WOW!)

Brenda