JAVAW.EXE slows computer to a crawl
 

I'm running WinXP Pro on

PIII 500
384 MB RAM
1.5GB Pagefile
50% of 146GB storage available across 4 drives

JRE 1.4

I have no performance problems with any other program I run, not even when I run OE6, IE6, VS .NET and MSDN .NET all at the same time.

But even if I run LimeWire with nothing else running in the background, Javaw.exe soaks up a minimum of 50% of the CPU usage, and usually bounces back and forth between 65% and 95% usage.

I literally cannot do anything else with the computer when LimeWire is running which makes it more or less useless to me, so I thought I'd see if anybody knows what's going on before I uninstall it.

Things, that can slow down LimeWire are:

- a couple of files, you are sharing
- LimeWire acting as an Ultrapeer with lots of connections
- downloading many, many files
- a bug that is yet to be found (but I'm almost sure, it's there)

I should have also mentioned that I'm on a cable modem conection, and:

I've tried disabling/enabling Ultrapeer

I've tried setting shares to 0

I generally do not download more than 5 or 6 files at any one time

None of it had any effect on the problem.... it can just sit there doing nothing and the CPU will be pegged at 60%+ by Javaw.exe

CPU usage
 

I have noticed in the versions of LimeWire after (but not including) 2.2.0, the CPU utilization at all times is extremely high, often bouncing up to over 90%. This is the reason I am still using 2.2.0. It is still there in the CVS version as of a few days ago.

Setting the process priority down helps some, but it still bogs down the system. I am going to be forced to move to another client if this is not fixed.

Thats odd, my limewire 2.3.1 only uses 10% cpu when a few uploads/downloads, and 5% when idle (10 ultrapeers connected) and 0% when disconnected from gnutella. And were talkin' Celeron 400mhz on XP :eek: :( :rolleyes:. You wouldn't by chance be using any of Stardock's products (WindowsBlinds, CursorXP, WindowsFX)? I find they despise and interfere heavily with anything Java (those three in particular). Fortunatly, most have an exclusion list u can add "javaw.exe" to. If not you don't use any of those, try temporarily disabling yer virus scanner, I keep finding an increasing number of problems with them, most of which slow a computer to a crawl or crash it incessantly. My two cents,

-Dividend

Possible cause
 

I've been experimenting with sharing different numbers of files and when I share a lot fewer files, my CPU usage goes down. It's possible that the code that looks up matches for incoming searches was changed in 2.2.1 and it now uses a lot more CPU.

I read in the Limewire FAQ that it is safe to open the task manager and set the priority of Limewire to BelowNormal or Low.

I have XP and Limewire eats up resources too. That's Java for you. Its portable, but runs like a piece of crap.

I have to ask, is this Limewire's fault for using Java, or is Windows just not friendly with Java and this is MS's fault?

If Limewire doesn't improve in the next 6 months I won't be buying the Pro version again when my subscription runs out.

-Brian

I've not paid for it yet, and I don't know that I will unless they address this issue..... it's particularly annoying when that box pops up on startup telling me how hard 7 programmers worked to make LimeWire for me and won't I pony up some cash for them.

I'll be happy to buy Limewire..... as soon as they fix it to where using their software doesn't turn my PC into a gigantic paper weight.

Thanks for all of the info everyone. We need to know a couple of things:

1) are you running as an UltraPeer when you see these CPU percentages (you can tell you're an UltraPeer if you have connections labelled as "leaf")

2) how many files are you sharing? do you see CPU usage go up if you share more files or down if you share less?

3) how many connections are you maintaining (in the connections tab)?

4) how fast is your web connection?

5) how fast is your machine (CPU)?

Thanks very much.

I've just installed Limewire, I saw the link to the forum so though I'd take a look.

After reading this thread I opened the task manager and checked out the CPU performance. It's averaging at around 4%, and occasionally peaking at 14%. Interesting.

I'm running:

1.3Ghz Athlon
768 meg
Windows XP Pro

Has there ever been any mention of difference in performance for AMD compared to Intel processors? I don't believe that a PIII 500 should struggle as much mentioned earlier.

Also, any performance difference between JRE 1.3.1 and 1.4?

First impressions on LimeWire - great for downloading music.

Cheers
Col

(Sorry missed a bit)

Running on cable whilst downloading 7 files.

Not had any uploads yet.

Cheers
Col

Thanks for the information. You should run fine on a machine like that (as you seem to be).

1.4 does run considerably faster than 1.3, so I'd recommend giving it a shot if you have the time (remember you have to reinstall LimeWire after installing 1.4 to get it to recognize it, unfortunately).

We've not heard of any speed differences with LimeWire between the Intels and the Athlons.

Thanks again. Any more info from others would be great too.

On my computer (WinXP, 384mb Ram, 700mhz athlon), LimeWire takes up 37 megs of ram without any files downloading. I am sharing 36 files and am a leaf.

Is this normal and is anything being done to reduce its footprint?

LimeWire generally has a high memory footprint, although it's usually not quite that large. There are some things we can do to reduce its footprint, although the larger issue is big footprints with Java programs in general, which we don't have control over.

PIII 500
384MB RAM
RoadRunner Cable

I was sharing 1500+ files. I changed it to 120 and set the upload slots to 0. There is no change in CPU loading.

I have selected "Disable Ultrapeer" on the Speed Tab in Options... There is no change in CPU loading.

I maintain 10 connections. I dropped it to 5 and it does seem to have dropped the CPU loading some.... it's fluctuating between 25% and 70%

My stats
 

I have 850MHz Athlon, 512MB, Win XP Pro, Limewire Pro 2.3.3, Java 1.4, sharing 2000 files.

Doesn't matter if I'm an ultra peer or not, javaw.exe averages 60MB of RAM!!
The minimum is 30MB and the most I see is 70MB, but 60-65 seems to be the most common.
CPU usage is between 0 and 40% although it jumps to 100% from time to time.

--Brian

I have more trouble with slow downloads
 

I used bearshare which maxed out my system resources. (it doesn't help that they install ad ware) My CPU usage is low. Around 20% on average, spiking at instants, but compared to BS which sat above 90... I find downloads slow, extremely slow for how fast my connection is.

100% usage
 

I have a 667MHz intel processor and just installed Limewire last night. I love to be able to download music but the software uses 100% CPU time. And when it does that is is reading the harddrive. I hae even disconnected from the internet and found it does not matter. Whatever this program is doing it is very frustrating.

Re 100% usage
 

It uses 100% of the CPU and grinds the disk for a while at startup as it's scanning your shared files and getting the bitrate of MP3s. It should go down after it's done with that. If you have a large number of files shared, the CPU usage could jump up fairly high as incoming searches are porcessed.

Hopefully the LimeWire developers will start writing a database of your shared files to the disk in new versions or LW so it doesn't have to scan them all at every startup. And I hope they figure out a way to reduce the CPU usage for people with large libraries by either doing whole word searches instead of partial matches or maybe using native C code for the search word lookup.

Thanks to everyone for the info -- we're looking further into this right now.

Two quick points: first, you're only acting as an UltraPeer if you see connections labelled as "leaf" in your connections tab. If you see, say, three connections labelled as UltraPeer, that means you're a leaf (but not that you won't be an UltraPeer someday -- UltraPeers are elected as the network needs them).

Second, the CPU on startup doesn't really "count". I'm more interested on if the CPU stays that high after you've been up for a minute or so. On the database idea, that would definitely improve loading speed and is probably a good idea, but it's not our top priority right now.

Thanks very much again -- any more little tidbits would be great if people have them.

XP Pro + Limewire 2.3.4 = slow
 

to afisk :

(Or is it 2.3.3? CNET.com says so. LimeWireWin.exe Properties says 2.3.4 (File version 7.2.42.0))

1) Not running Ultrapeer (or anything other than Limewire) while CPU runs 20 to 70 averaging 30

2) Sharing 4150 files : sharing 0 files makes no difference

3) Maintaining 3 connections in the connections tab. Uploads Per Person 3, Start Upload Slots 5, Max 5

4) Cable

5) 1 GHz Athlon, 512, ASUS A7V133

The puffy XP task bar flickers, occasionally disappearing altogether for a 3 count. The machine grinds.
ONLY Limewire -- in contradistinction to whatever scenario of concurrent aps I may choose -- will dare this. Going back to 2.0.2. Which is the best of them all and who has it?

Great programme otherwise!

rems

To Adam
 

Adam,
I'm glad you're looking into these issues. For me the biggest issue is the program crashing after 30min-1hour of use. I could live with it using a lot of resources on my computer because I have them to spare, and its easy to turn limewire off. The instability of Limewire Pro is annoying though.

Is there anything I can do to help with fixing stability?

Here's part of the dump I got from a crash:

Error Signature:
AppName: javaw.exe AppVer: 0.0.0.0 ModName: jvm.dll
ModVer: 0.0.0.0 Offset: 0004643f

-----------------------

Event Type: Error
Event Source: Application Error
Event Category: None
Event ID: 1000
Date: 4/15/2002
Time: 9:43:31 AM
User: N/A
Computer: KENNEDY
Description:
Faulting application javaw.exe, version 0.0.0.0, faulting module jvm.dll, version 0.0.0.0, fault address 0x0004643f.

For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
Data:
0000: 41 70 70 6c 69 63 61 74 Applicat
0008: 69 6f 6e 20 46 61 69 6c ion Fail
0010: 75 72 65 20 20 6a 61 76 ure jav
0018: 61 77 2e 65 78 65 20 30 aw.exe 0
0020: 2e 30 2e 30 2e 30 20 69 .0.0.0 i
0028: 6e 20 6a 76 6d 2e 64 6c n jvm.dl
0030: 6c 20 30 2e 30 2e 30 2e l 0.0.0.
0038: 30 20 61 74 20 6f 66 66 0 at off
0040: 73 65 74 20 30 30 30 34 set 0004
0048: 36 34 33 66 0d 0a 643f..

~_~_~_~_~_~_~_

I'm running XP Pro.

-Brian

Thanks to everyone for the data. The one thing we really need to nail down is whether or not your LimeWire's are running as UltraPeers when you're seeing these numbers. Again, you can tell if your LimeWire is running as an UltraPeer by looking at the connections tab (which is disabled by default, but you can turn it on in the "View" menu). If you have connections that say "leaf", that means that you are an UltraPeer. In this case, you should see many connections (above 5 or 6). Actually, sending screenshots of the connections tab to me at afisk@limewire.com would be very helpful.

On the XP issue, I really have no idea what's going on. It's likely that there's a bug in the JVM, as there is theoretically no way for LimeWire to cause a native error like that because it's running java. What version of the JVM are you using? You might want to try a different one, like the 1.4 JVM, available from java.sun.com

Thanks again.

I'm using Sun 1.4

I emailed you

-Brian

Found a bug! Any others?
 

We found the cause of at least one of the performance/memory problems yesterday. Apparently LimeWire can slow to a crawl when sending lots of metadata (bitrates, etc.) in response to a query. This can happen in leaf or ultrapeer mode. It will typically happen to people sharing lots of files*. We're working hard on a fix and will release this in LW 2.4 in a week or two. The new version should be significantly better.

However, there are some reports that LimeWire will use too much CPU when downloading files, even when disconnected from the network. Has anyone else seen this? Try disconnecting from the network (File->Disconnect) while downloading. If the CPU usage is high, there's a problem. Any data would be most appreciated.

-Chris

*LimeWire should be able to share lots of files without any noticeable CPU impact, since it uses an efficient data structure for queries.

CPU usage still maxing out in version 2.4
 

Did this problem get fixed in 2.5, I hope?

swap under nt4 sp6
 

hello,

I have the same mistake but under nt4 sp 6 (p3 733, 128mo ram). I saw the same with another peer to peer soft called omega. they are a patch. as the same under limewire.

thanks

Geez, its all relative I suppose? DAMMIT
 

I've got a P-II 233, with IDE disk drives, and fortunately a 3COM Co-processed LAN card (does IP on the card and not on the CPU).... My CPU utilization is 0-6% while downloading with Limewire....


HOWEVER, I do notice that javaw.exe is sucking up more than 43MBs of ram, making CPU to memory searches painful, at best. I think the Limewire folks need to dump the JRE and alternative java engines for support if they want their app to remain consistantly stable and consistantly performing.


I'm not ponying up my 10 or 100 bucks without a decent rewrite of this application.

***********************************
Hey there LimeWire Developers... I think I speak for a lot of us here... Get a few more hot shot coders to address these issues, and we WILL part with our wallets.
***********************************


Regards,

John Dunham
dunham_john@hotmail.com

slow
 

PII 233... Limewire uses 90% of mine... Runnin on a T1 here at school, and not usin ultrareaper... The program has crashed on me a few times as well. The downloads are faster cause the school lowered the bandwith priority on the Kazaa protocol so limewire is what I looked to next... I would love to stay with it cause it is nice. Also, I would love to be able to scroll w/ my mouse wheel while in my library window. Anthing to fix this? Dont let 'er use so much resources, fix the scrolling thing, and I'll be an even happier camper...

Justin
allowat399@hotmail.com