After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 584863 - eog uses too much memory
eog uses too much memory
Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE
Product: eog
Classification: Core
Component: image viewer
2.26.x
Other All
: Normal minor
: ---
Assigned To: EOG Maintainers
EOG Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2009-06-04 20:06 UTC by Dominik Holler
Modified: 2012-11-20 21:41 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Dominik Holler 2009-06-04 20:06:30 UTC
Please describe the problem:
eog trys to open very large images. If the image is too big, the system is just swaping, and it is hard to stop it.
possible solutions:
  - eog should not open very large images
  - eog could create carefuly a scaled small version of the image, and shows the scaled down version

Steps to reproduce:
1. open a very large image in eog
2. 
3. 


Actual results:
system is swapping, it is hard to close eog to get the system in a useable state

Expected results:
eog shows the image without swapping, or aborts with an error

Does this happen every time?
yes

Other information:
Comment 1 Felix Riemann 2009-06-11 19:56:41 UTC
Not sure what we can do about this.

It's hard to determine an image's size in advance (filesize is not reliable) due to fileformat restrictions and the way gdk-pixbuf works. Scaling AFAIK requires loading the full image once anyway, too.

I think it's also hard to explain to the average user why he only gets a lo-fi variant of a picture.

How large are your images that they make your system swap? 1 GB of RGB is roughly 20000x20000px (a little less).
Comment 2 Claudio Saavedra 2010-04-07 10:12:26 UTC
It's also possible to load a scaled version of an image with gdk_pixbuf_loader_set_size () in response to the GdkPixbufLoader::size-prepared signal. Still, I would make this very optional or only do it when it is obvious that the image size is ridiculously big (users could be warned about this beforehand).
Comment 3 Hiroyuki Ikezoe 2010-04-08 04:07:32 UTC
In case of SVG image, the image which is got through GdkPixbufLoader is not reliable when the image is zoomed in or out, so I am in favor of the use of gdk_pixbufloader_set_size.
Comment 4 Tobias Mueller 2010-05-24 13:33:18 UTC
Reopening as I can't see any open non-developer question.
Comment 5 Felix Riemann 2010-08-20 14:08:33 UTC
gdk_pixbuf_loader_set_size won't help here I think.

It's AFAIK scaling the image after having loaded it. So, if the unscaled image is making you swap, it will do just the same in this case (even more so as the scaled image simultaneously needs additional memory).

Also, what do you do if you modify the (then scaled) image and save it? You would have to reload it unscaled -> swapping.

Regarding SVGs: If everything goes by plans we'll draw them without using the pre-rendered variant as a placeholder during filtering soon (bug 626795).

I'd say this is more or less a CANTFIX.
Comment 6 Dominik Holler 2010-08-20 14:13:04 UTC
Maybe it is possible to limit the amount of data memory for a single eog instance?
Comment 7 TCHATTE 2011-12-17 22:02:25 UTC
Hello,

I have a similar problem with animated gif. When I open a 16.8Mo GIF, GwenView uses 37Mo while eog uses 920Mo of memory! So I have regular swap or crashes for bigger animated GIFs (sometimes I build GIFs > 50 Mo .... don't ask me why ^^). I looked for a solution (except openning them with GwenView) but I did not find anything usefull on google so I try here. Is it already reported? Is there a way to fix it?
My version of eog is 2.32.0 on Ubuntu 10.10. I tried on another PC which is also on Ubuntu 10.10 and the result is similar.
Thanks
Comment 8 nodiscc 2012-07-28 14:03:56 UTC
This bug was reported against a version which is not supported any more. Developers are no longer working on this version so there will not be any bug fixes for it.
Can you please check again if the issue you reported here still happens in a recent version of GNOME and update this report by adding a comment and adjusting the 'Version' field?

Again thank you for reporting this and sorry that it could not be fixed for the version you originally used here.

Without feedback this report will be closed as INCOMPLETE after 6 weeks.
Comment 9 Tobias Mueller 2012-11-20 21:41:14 UTC
Closing this bug report as no further information has been provided. Please feel free to reopen this bug if you can provide the information asked for.
Thanks!