I'm using OxyPlot in my wpf application as line recorder. It's like the LiveDemo example.
On a larg visible data set, I get some UI performance issues and may the whole application could freez. It seems to be PlotModel.InvalidatePlot which is called with to many points to often, but I didn't found a better way.
In deep:
Using OxyPlot 2.0.0
I code all in the PlotModel. The Xaml PlotView is only binding to the PlotModel.
I cyclical collect data in a thread an put them in a DataSource (List of List which are ItemSoure for the LineSeries)
I have a class which calculates cyclical in a thread the presentation for x and y axis and a bit more. After all this stuff, it calls PlotModel.InvalidatePlot.
If I
have more than 100 k points on the display (no matter if in multiple LineSeries or not)
and add 1 DataPoint per LineSeries every 500 ms
and call PlotModel.InvalidatePlot every 200 ms
not only the PlotView has performance issues, also the window is very slow in reaction, even if I call PlotModel.InvalidatePlot (false).
My goal
My goal would be that the Windo / Application is working normally. It should not hang up because of a line recorder. The best would be if it has no performance issues, but I'm skeptical.
What I have found or tested
OxyPlot has Performance guidelines. I'm using ItemsSource with DataPoints. I have also tried adding them directly to the LineSeris.Points, but then the Plot doesn’t refresh anyway (even with an ObservableCollection), so I have to call PlotModel.InvalidatePlot, what results in the same effect. I cannot bind to a defined LineSeries in Xaml because I don’t know how much Lines will be there. Maybe I missed something on adding the points directly?
I have also found a Github issue 1286 which is describing a related problem, but this workaround is slower in my tests.
I have also checked the time which is elapsed on the call of PlotModel.InvalidatePlot, but the count of points does not affect it.
I have checked the UI thread and it seems it have trouble to handle this large set of points
If I zoom in to the plot and display under 20 k Points it looks so
Question:
Is there a way to handle this better, except to call PlotModel.InvalidatePlot much less?
Restrictions:
I also must Update Axis and Annotations. So, I think I will not come around to call PlotModel.InvalidatePlot.
I have found that using the OxyPlot Windows Forms implementation and then displaying it using Windows Form integration in WPF gives much better performance.
e.g.
var plotView = new OxyPlot.WindowsForms.PlotView();
plotView.Model = Plot;
var host = new System.Windows.Forms.Integration.WindowsFormsHost();
host.Child = plotView;
PlotContainer = host;
Where 'Plot' is the PlotModel you call InvalidatePlot() on.
And then in your XAML:
<ContentControl Content="{Binding PlotContainer}"/>
Or however else you want to use your WindowsFormsHost.
I have a similar problem and found that you can use a Decimator in LineSeries. It is documented in the examples: LineSeriesExamples.cs
The usage is like this:
public static PlotModel WithXDecimator()
{
var model = new PlotModel { Title = "LineSeries with X Decimator" };
var s1 = CreateSeriesSuitableForDecimation();
s1.Decimator = Decimator.Decimate;
model.Series.Add(s1);
return model;
}
This may solve the problem on my side, and I hope it helps others too. Unfortunately it is not documented in the documentation
For the moment I ended up with calculating the time for calling InvalidatePlot for the next time. I calculate it with the method given in this answer, wich returns the number of visible points. This rededuce the performance issue, but dosent fix the block on the UI Thread on calling InvalidatePlot.
Related
I am testing a WPF application and am not privy to it's exact workings but I am finding many instances where I need to find if a control is shown. All the traditional answers on this on Stack Overflow and MS forums etc say to use one of the following ...
IsVisible,
Exists,
TryGetClickablePoint,
State (e.g. OffScreen
The problem is that for this system, many controls return true for all of those even when the control cannot be seen! They also return a point with co-ordinates (-1, -1, -1, -1) whether the control is visible or not.
The only thing I have had any success with is using a try catch finally. I try to click on the control and if that fails, I go in to the catch block. That takes 60 seconds to time out though and I am getting intermittent issues with tests that run 9 times out of 10. Maybe the constant use of try catch is causing performance issues.
Is there an approach that actually works when all the standard approaches fail? I have noticed lots of other people asking these question are also testing WPF. Is there something WPF developers are doing to hide controls that makes CodedUI think they are still present and visible etc. Are they just behind something?
Many thanks in advance.
The solution was two-fold. Firstly I had to find the element and this was not working properly with my recorded steps. The element was buried too deeply in the system under test which is WPF (XAML). Secondly I had to prove I had found the element and for this I can't use TryGetClickablePoint, Exists, Top or Width. None of them seemed to work properly at all for my element. I had to use State.
public void Assert_MyElementShown()
{
#region Variable Declarations
WpfCustom uISurfaceCustom = this.UISysUnderTestClientShWindow.UIItemCustom1.UISurfaceCustom;
WpfCustom uIYAxisLabelsCustom = new WpfCustom();
#endregion
//Find the Element using it's Container and SearchProperties
uIYAxisLabelsCustom.Container = uISurfaceCustom;
uIYAxisLabelsCustom.SearchProperties[WpfControl.PropertyNames.ClassName] = "Uia.AxisLabelControl";
uIYAxisLabelsCustom.SearchProperties[WpfControl.PropertyNames.AutomationId] = "YAxisLabels";
//Use the State to find if it's on screen or not
var state = uIYAxisLabelsCustom.State;
if (state == Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UITest.Extension.ControlStates.Default)
{
//Element is visible, do stuff here!
}
else if (state == Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UITest.Extension.ControlStates.Offscreen)
{
//The control may exist, it may have location on screen and may even
//appear to be clickable according to coded ui framework but is is NOT
//shown on the screen.
}
}
You can try this approach for your application..if control properties are showing true for viable than we can go for height and width.Means if control is not visible in UI and but still all properties are showing true than check control height and width must be in -ve number.Than we can keep a assertion like
If control.height<0
Not visible in UI
I am using the SharpDX.WPF project for the WPF abilities, it seems like an easy to understand low-overhead library, compared to the Toolkit that comes with SharpDX (which has the same issue!)
First: I fixed the SharpDX.WPF project for the latest SharpDX using the following: https://stackoverflow.com/a/19791534/442833
Then I made the following hacky adjustment to DXElement.cs, a solution that was also done here:
private Query queryForCompletion;
public void Render()
{
if (Renderer == null || IsInDesignMode)
return;
var test = Renderer as D3D11;
if (queryForCompletion == null)
{
queryForCompletion = new Query(test.Device,
new QueryDescription {Type = QueryType.Event, Flags = QueryFlags.None});
}
Renderer.Render(GetDrawEventArgs());
Surface.Lock();
test.Device.ImmediateContext.End(queryForCompletion);
// wait until drawing completes
Bool completed;
var counter = 0;
while (!(test.Device.ImmediateContext.GetData(queryForCompletion, out completed)
&& completed))
{
Console.WriteLine("Yielding..." + ++counter);
Thread.Yield();
}
//Surface.Invalidate();
Surface.AddDirtyRect(new Int32Rect(0, 0, Surface.PixelWidth, Surface.PixelHeight));
Surface.Unlock();
}
Then I render 8000 cubes in a cube pattern...
Yielding...
gets printed to the console quite often, but the flickering is still there.
I am assuming that WPF is nice enough to show the image using a different thread before the rendering is done, not sure though...
This same issue also happens when I use the Toolkit variant of WPF support with SharpDX.
Images to demonstate the issue:
Bad
Better
Almost
Intended
Note: It randomly switches between these old images, randomly. I am also using really old hardware which makes the flickering much more appearant (GeForce Quadro FX 1700)
A made a repo which contains the exact same source-code as I am using to get this issue:
https://github.com/ManIkWeet/FlickeringIssue/
Related to D3DImage locking, note that the D3DImage.TryLock API has rather unconventional semantics which most developers would not expect:
Beware!
You must call Unlock even in the case where TryLock indicates failure (i.e., returns false)
Although perhaps more of an alarming design choice than a bug per se, misunderstanding this behavior will trivially result in D3DImage deadlocks and hangs, and thus might be responsible for much of the frustration people experience in attempting to get D3DImage working properly.
The following code is a correct WPF D3D render with no flicker in my app:
void WPF_D3D_render(IntPtr pSurface)
{
if (TryLock(new Duration(default(TimeSpan))))
{
SetBackBuffer(D3DResourceType.IDirect3DSurface9, pSurface);
AddDirtyRect(new Int32Rect(0, 0, PixelWidth, PixelHeight));
}
Unlock(); // <--- !
}
Yes, this unintuitive code is actually correct; it is the case that that D3DImage.TryLock(0) leaks one internal D3D buffer lock every time it returns failure. You don't have to take my word for it, here's the CLR code from PresentationCore.dll v4.0.30319:
private bool LockImpl(Duration timeout)
{
bool flag = false;
if (_lockCount == uint.MaxValue)
throw new InvalidOperationException();
if (_lockCount == 0)
{
if (timeout == Duration.Forever)
flag = _canWriteEvent.WaitOne();
else
flag = _canWriteEvent.WaitOne(timeout.TimeSpan, false);
UnsubscribeFromCommittingBatch();
}
_lockCount++;
return flag;
}
Notice that the internal _lockCount field is incremented regardless of whether the function returns success or failure. You have to call Unlock() yourself, as shown in the first code example above, if you want to avoid certain deadlock. Failing to do so creates is nasty to debug, too, because the component won't (potentially) deadlock until the next render pass, by which time the relevant evidence is long gone.
The unusual behavior does not seem to be mentioned at MSDN, but to be fair, that documentation doesn't note that you have to call Unlock() if the call is successful, either.
The problem is not the Locking mechanism. Normally you use Present to draw to present the image. Present will wait until all drawing is ready. With D3DImage you are not using the Present() method. Instead of Presenting, you lock, adding a DirtyRect and unlock the D3DImage.
The rendering is done asynchrone so when you are unlocking, the draw actions might not be ready. This is causing the flicker effect. Sometimes you see items half drawn. A poor solution (i've tested with) is adding a small delay before unlocking. It helped a little, but it wasn't a neat solution. It was terrible!
Solution:
I continued with something else; I was expirimenting with MSAA (antialiasing) and the first problem I faced was; MSAA cannot be done on the dx11/dx9 shared texture, so i decided to render to a new texture (dx11) and create a copy to the dx9 shared texture. I slammed my head on the tabel, because now it was anti-aliased AND flicking-free!! Don't forget to call Flush() before adding a dirty rect.
So, creating a copy of the texture: DXDevice11.Device.ImmediateContext.ResolveSubresource(_dx11RenderTexture, 0, _dx11BackpageTexture, 0, ColorFormat); (_dx11BackpageTexture is shared texture) will wait until the rendering is ready and will create a copy.
This is how I got rid of the flickering....
I think you are not locking properly. As far as I understand the MSDN documentation you are supposed to lock during the entire rendering not just at the end of it:
While the D3DImage is locked, your application can also render to the Direct3D surface assigned to the back buffer.
The information you find on the net about D3DImage/SharpDX is somewhat confusing because the SharpDX guys don't really like the way D3DImage is implemented (can't blame them), so there are statements about this being a "bug" on Microsofts side when its actually just improper usage of the API.
Yes, locking during rendering has performance issues, but it is probably not possible to fix them without porting WPF to DirectX11 and implementing something like a SwapChainPanel which is available in UWP apps. (WPF itself still runs on DirectX9)
If the locking is a performance issue for you, one idea I had (but never tested) is that you could render to an offscreen surface and reduce the lock duration to copying that surface over to the D3DImage. No idea if that would help performance wise but its something to try.
I have trouble getting Map behave properly when calling ZoomToResolution and PanTo
I need to be able to Zoom into specific coordinate and center map.
The only way I got it working is by removing animations:
this.MapControl.ZoomDuration = new TimeSpan(0);
this.MapControl.PanDuration = new TimeSpan(0);
Otherwise if I make call like this:
control.MapControl.ZoomToResolution(ZoomLevel);
control.MapControl.PanTo(MapPoint());
It does one or another (i.e. pan or zoom, but not both). If (after animation) I call this code second time (map already zoomed or panned to needed position/level) - it does second part.
Tried this:
control.MapControl.ZoomToResolution(ZoomLevel, MapPoint());
Same issue, internally it calls above commands
So, my only workaround right now is to set Zoom/Pan duration to 0. And it makes for bad UX when using mouse.
I also tried something like this:
this.MapControl.ZoomDuration = new TimeSpan(0);
this.MapControl.PanDuration = new TimeSpan(0);
control.MapControl.ZoomToResolution(ZoomLevel);
control.MapControl.PanTo(MapPoint());
this.MapControl.ZoomDuration = new TimeSpan(750);
this.MapControl.PanDuration = new TimeSpan(750);
Which seems to be working, but then mouse interaction becomes "crazy". Mouse scroll will make map jump and zoom to random places.
Is there known solution?
The problem is the second operation replaces the previous one. You would have to wait for one to complete before starting the next one. But that probably doesn't give the effect you want.
Instead zoom to an extent, and you'll get the desired behavior. If you don't have the extent but only center and resolution, you can create one using the following:
var zoomToExtent = new Envelope(point.X - resolution * MapControl.ActualWidth/2, point.Y, point.X + resolution * MapControl.ActualWidth/2, point.Y);
Btw it's a little confusing in your code that you call your resolution "ZoomLevel". I assume this is a map resolution, and not a level number right? The esri map control doesn't deal with service-specific levels, but is agnostic to the data's levels and uses a more generic "units per pixels" resolution value.
I would like to create animations where Duration is not set, but instead it is calculated based on an absolute speed setting. E.g. I want the animation to happen at 100 pixels/second and the duration is calculated automatically based on To and From values. If the path is 350 pixels, the animation will take 3.5 seconds to finish.
Duration.Automatic is NOT for this. Also Animation.SpeedRatio is a different thing.
I can of course calculate the duration from the path length, but I will have many objects moving on the screen, each created and removed procedural way and personally find it clumsy to bother with this.
What is a nice solution? Is there any built-in behaviour for this in Silverlight 4 or later?
Imaginary code:
DoubleAnimation ani = new DoubleAnimation();
ani.From = 0;
ani.To = 200;
ani.AbsoluteSpeed = "300 pixels / sec";
storyBoard1.Begin(); // now my animation will take 0.66 sec
Use code like:-
ani.Duration = new Duration(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(200 / myPixelsPerSecond))
This is not at all "clumsy".
If the use of such a fairly straight forward expression would merit the addition of new property what would happen if the same approach were applied to the rest of the available API? The set of these "helpful" properties would expand to unmanagable levels. The API would be crushed by the weight of zillions of similar properties all performing fairly simple expressions for setting the true fundemental properties.
Elegance (the opposite of clusmy) is having a small set of carefully chosen properties that can be combined in a zillions ways using simple expressions. Exactly as above.
Is there some reason that identical math operations would take significantly longer in one Silverlight app than in another?
For example, I have some code that takes a list of points and transforms them (scales and translates them) and populates another list of points. It's important that I keep the original points intact, hence the second list.
Here's the relevant code (scale is a double and origin is a point):
public Point transformPoint(Point point) {
// scale, then translate the x
point.X = (point.X - origin.X) * scale;
// scale, then translate the y
point.Y = (point.Y - origin.Y) * scale;
// return the point
return point;
}
Here's how I'm doing the loop and timing, in case it's important:
DateTime startTime = DateTime.Now;
foreach (Point point in rawPoints) transformedPoints.Add(transformPoint(point));
Debug.Print("ASPX milliseconds: {0}", (DateTime.Now - startTime).Milliseconds);
On a run of 14356 points (don't ask, it's modeled off a real world number in the desktop app), the breakdown is as follows:
Silverlight app #1: 46 ms
Silverlight app #2: 859 ms
The first app is an otherwise empty app that is doing the loop in the MainPage constructor. The second is doing the loop in a method in another class, and the method is called during an event handler in the GUI thread, I think. But should any of that matter, considering that identical operations are happening within the loop itself?
There maybe something huge I'm missing in how threading works or something, but this discrepancy doesn't make sense to me at all.
In addition to the other comments and answers I'm going to read between the lines a little.
In the first app you have pretty much this code in isolation running in the MainPage constructor. IWO you've create a fresh Silverlight app and slapped this code in it and thats it.
In the second app you have more actual real world stuff. At the very least you have this code running as the result of a button click on a rudimentory UI. Therein lies the clue.
Take a blank app and drop a button on it. Run it and click the button, what does the button do? There are animations attached to visual states of the button. This animation (or other animations or loops) are likely running in parrallel with your code when you click the button. Timers (whether you do it properly with StopWatch or not) record elapsed time, not just the time your thread takes. Hence when other threads are doing other things (like animations) your timing will be off.
My first suspicion would be that Silverlight App #2 triggers a garbage collection. Scaling ~15,000 points should be taking a millisecond, not nearly a second.
Try to reduce memory allocations in your code. Can transformedPoints be an array, rather than a dynamically grown data structure?
You can also look at the GC performance counters, but simply reducing the memory allocation may turn out to be simpler.
Could it be possible your code is not being inlined in the CLR by the app that is running slower?
I'm not sure how the CLR in SL handles inlining, but here is a link to some of the prerequisites for inlining in 3.5 SP1.
http://udooz.net/blog/2009/04/clr-improvements-in-net-35-sp1/