Issue 7968 - Resource Requirements
Summary: Resource Requirements
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of issue 20269
Alias: None
Product: General
Classification: Code
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: current
Hardware: All All
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: OOo 2.0
Assignee: matthias.huetsch
QA Contact: issues@framework
URL:
Keywords:
: 14147 (view as issue list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2002-09-30 02:46 UTC by Unknown
Modified: 2003-09-28 15:14 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description Unknown 2002-09-30 02:46:07 UTC
Any word processor that requires 99 Megs of ram before it's even loaded, is 
going to have problems with people accepting it on older machines. 
 
kword uses 25MB ram - including all supplort apps that go with it 
OfficeWriter = 99MB - blank sheet. 
 
Are you going to modularise it further, and only pull in dynamicly loaded code 
when you need it? 
 
You're gonna have to - A lot of people out there are using 64MB of ram, where 
it swaps to the point of distraction
Comment 1 brant 2002-11-08 01:14:21 UTC
My memory usage for a blank OpenOffice Writer document is 41,356 K. 
That is not as much as awrinkler repoterd, but it does seem like alot
for a blank document.  Mozilla, with all components loaded is only
304,136 K and that is after using it for a while.  I say this is an
enhancement issue related to memory footprint.
I am using build 673 on WinXP AMD AthlonXP 1700+ with 512MB RAM.  This
seems to be a cross-platform issue so Platform and OS may be updated.
 I also think this is the wrong component.
Comment 2 brant 2002-11-24 15:36:07 UTC
I am moving this to a more appropriate component.  By they way, I see
this with 643c.  No takbar button appears until 20000 K and the
program is not usable until 61000 K.
Comment 3 michael.bemmer 2003-03-24 12:50:05 UTC
API is definitely the wrong component, framework is a little better.
Calling this a "defect" is not correct, I guess. Matthias, can you
comment on that? 
Comment 4 matthias.huetsch 2003-03-24 17:31:12 UTC
Changing subcomponent from 'www' to 'code', though this is not
directly related to 'framework' code. But I think, we have no better
component than 'framework' for tracking issues of this kind.

Issue type of 'request for enhancement' is surely appropriate, though
I personally would have no problem in accepting this as a 'defect'.

In order to fix this issue, several things need to be redesigned
(and this is where I tend to agree to a 'defect' in the current
design), so that a target of 'OOo 2.0' seems appropriate.

Thus, I'm accepting to take care of this issue.
Comment 5 matthias.huetsch 2003-05-19 10:05:08 UTC
Adding description from issue 14147, marking that as duplicate:

I would like to see an option to allow OO to run without using so much
RAM.  
Currently, when I use my Win2K machine, OO preloads about 35 megabytes of 
program into RAM.  This is ok on my newer machines at home.  At work,
however, 
where we have some older machines running win 98 first edition and win
95, this 
is a problem.  We are using machines with 32 and 48 megabytes of RAM
total.  
Now, OO still runs on these machines, but they swap like crazy and are
very 
slow and jerky.  It would be neat if you could figure out a way to get
OO to 
work without using so much in the way of system resources.  By the way, I 
noticed that StarOffice 6.1 beta uses about 10 megabytes less RAM than
OO 1.1 
beta

Comment 6 matthias.huetsch 2003-05-19 10:15:48 UTC
*** Issue 14147 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 7 matthias.huetsch 2003-09-28 15:13:06 UTC
Hi all,

Further progress in this area and the tasks to achieve that progress
are now tracked under issue 20269 as a meta task. Issue 20269 has a
higher priority than this one, and I'm owning it as well.

Therefore I'm going to close this issue as duplicate to issue 20269
(which will be recorded in there as well, so no information is lost).

Matthias

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 20269 ***
Comment 8 matthias.huetsch 2003-09-28 15:14:22 UTC
closing...