8 Replies Latest reply on Sep 14, 2015 2:33 AM by bob frost

    Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)

    PJ_Traveler Level 1

      I have a high end system windows 7 system

      -64 GB Mem

      -All SSD disks for program,  swap, catalog

      - HW raid 5 for photos

      -high end GPU

      -6 (or 12 with hyper threading) core CPU


      • I have ~220,000 photos in LR organized by date as raw files.
      • I have turned off using the GPU which provided a significant improvement in usability (too bad really)
      • I run LR above normal priority (seems to help a bit)
      • Thumbnail cache  file size is ~2.5 GB, but specified at 25 GB just to insure that there is enough room
      • Thumbnails set to never expire
      • On start up can only drive CPU utilization to about 10%
      • With large meta data updates can drive CPU utilization to about 25%
      • LR configured to write .xmp files (which is why the large updates to meta take a while)
      • LR catalog is about 5.5 GB (you would expect the whole thing to be in memory- why isn't it?)



      • It takes about 5 minutes for LR to start up and populate the Library module with counts of photos, and fill the current  directory  (Grid view) with thumbnails.
      • The system has 51 GB of free memory
      • LR is only using 1 GB of memory (sometimes I can get it up to 2 GB)
      • Meta data updates to a directory with a ~200 photos takes 10 to 30 seconds.
      • switching directories often takes 30 seconds for the grid view to become populated
      • LR is the top process  (other than idle) on the system with other processes taking 3% or less of the CPU,  total system busy ~20%



      • SQLite is poorly configured (doesn't take advantage of available memory)
      • IO operations are byte operations rather than block operations
      • LR LUA environment does not take advantage of memory available
      • Photoshop with its slider to choose how much memory to use works very well with noticeable performance improvements with more memory
      • As part of directory displaying a grid, it goes and reads every XMP file and /or photo



      1. Does anyone know how to change the LR environment to take advantage of available memory ( LUA or SQLite)?
      2. Any other performance tweaks?


      Thanks ahead of time,

      Patrick Lynch

        • 1. Re: Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)
          PJ_Traveler Level 1

          I have found that adding more worker threads in Windows 7 has helped improve the performance, particularly on start up.  Estimating that it is a third better, i.e. if it took 30 seconds it now takes 20 seconds.

          • 2. Re: Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)
            dj_paige Level 9

            Showing thumbnails has nothing to with memory. It is almost entirely based on disk speed.


            Your catalog file and previews ought to be on your fastest disk. What disks do you have on your system, what are their speeds, and what disk contains the catalog file and preview cache?

            • 3. Re: Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)
              PJ_Traveler Level 1

              Catalog, previews are all on the fastest SSD (M.2-500GB) I have.  It was still slow.  Program disk is another SSD. Photos on a raid5 supporting NCQ with buffered reads and writes, blocksize 256K


              Adding the worker threads has made quite a difference, I can now drive the CPU at 40% to 60% utilization when I am in develop.

              The load time for thumbnails is almost instantaneous, even on medium to large directories.  I have a 14,000 item smart collection and that took about 15 seconds for thumbnails, so all in all much faster with more worker threads.  (if you try adding threads, make sure that you have enough resources (cpu & memory)).


              LR is running 78-79 threads. Windows worker threads  totaled 26 before, now at 56

              • 4. Re: Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)
                ManiacJoe Adobe Community Professional

                How does one add worker threads?

                • 5. Re: Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)
                  PJ_Traveler Level 1

                  Make sure that you have excess CPU and memory before doing this !



                  • 6. Re: Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)
                    ManiacJoe Adobe Community Professional

                    Thanks for the link!

                    I take it you were playing with the "AdditionalDelayedWorkerThreads"?

                    • 7. Re: Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)
                      PJ_Traveler Level 1

                      I increased both critical and delayed worker threads.  I up'd the numbers again, and again got  a performance boost.  The system is now performing more like how I thought it should.

                      • 8. Re: Poor Performance for LR6 (not CC)
                        bob frost Level 3

                        I'm surprised at the poor performance that you describe. I use a fast desktop (3ssds, 1Hdd, 32GB ram, 6/12 core cpu, x99 mobo, Win10) and don't normally have any such problems. LR (CC2015.1.1) opens quickly, the no's fill in faster than I can look at them, and the screen fills with images almost instantly (provided I have made previews for all the images).


                        IME, and I've been using LR since version 1, the sort of symptoms you are describing are usually due to corruption somewhere in the previews themselves, the previews.db, or the root-pixels.db. The acr cache isn't used much, so is unlikely to be involved in your problem.  The cure, IME, is to delete all the previews, previews.db and rootpixels.db, and regenerate new ones. If you are doing this, also purge the acr cache as it will make new dat files when it creates the new previews.


                        As it happens, I'm in the middle of doing this with my 100K nefs, a day and a half gone and another to go before it finishes. I make all standard previews first, and then only make the 1:1s that I need. Since the 1.1 update, LR now takes about 5 secs for a 1:1 preview for a big 36Mp nef, and 1-2 secs for the smaller ones. Standard previews are quicker. I'm doing this because I noticed a bit of a slowdown (nothing like yours) in filling the screen with images the other day, and thought "right, it's time to redo the previews." I probably redo them every six months or so. When I do this I usually also delete the old Prefs file and start afresh with a new one. So I just keep my catalog and settings stored alongside the catalog.


                        Writing stuff out to xmp is a known time-waster, so I don't do that. There are quite enough other background tasks going on in LR without that one taking up more resources.


                        I looked at your extra threads stuff and decided I didn't need to go there! When just LR is running making previews, it uses about 6GB of ram, there are 1300 threads in existence, and it uses 25% - 50% of my cpu (up to 100% if I turn off hyperthreading).


                        Hope this might help.


                        Bob Frost