Qt6 Windows slower than Qt6 Ubuntu

[JonB]

@Joe-von-Habsburg
I have suggested what you should test first, but you have said nothing each time.. I also suggested you do not test anything with the "debug" in "debug line and graphic".

[Joe von Habsburg]

@JonB I run release versions, and I saw same thing. Any advice for get request ? And is it possible, gcc more performance than msvc ?

[JonB]

@Joe-von-Habsburg
No, compiler is not going to make any difference when fetching data over a network and it's taking hundreds of milliseconds.

[Joe von Habsburg]

@JonB

I wrote basic program just taking data. (Because I suspect other code lines slow me). I saw same output.

Can you give me code example for get request ?

[JonB]

@JonB said in Qt6 Windows slower than Qt6 Ubuntu:

How do timings compare on each platform quite outside of a Qt program?

[Joe von Habsburg]

@JonB I watched graphic speed

[jsulm]

@Joe-von-Habsburg You should read more carefully what others write. What @JonB suggested is that you try to get the data with a non Qt application on both platforms to see whether the behaviour is the same or not...

[Joe von Habsburg]

@jsulm I used javascript for get request.

const deneme = async() => {
    while(true){
        var date1 = new Date();
    
        var res = await fetch('http://localhost:54664/sample')
        var data = await res.json();
        console.log("sample len : ",data.samples[0].length)
    
        var date2 = new Date();
    
        var res2 = await fetch('http://localhost:54665/sample')
        var data2 = await res2.json();
        console.log("sample len : ",data2.samples[0].length)
    
        var date3 = new Date();
    
        console.log("sample : ", date2-date1, " - iq : ", date3 - date2, " - time : ", date3 - date1);
    }
}


deneme();

I saw same times between ubuntu and windows (90ms).
I think the problem is in windows Qt. Any idea ?

[jsulm]

@Joe-von-Habsburg You should try to do your networking properly: without local event loops. Qt is asynchronous.

[Christian Ehrlicher]

... And you should/must not recreate the QNetworkAcceesManager every time.

[Joe von Habsburg]

@Christian-Ehrlicher said in Qt6 Windows slower than Qt6 Ubuntu:

And you should/must not recreate the QNetworkAcceesManager every time.

This work for me. Thank you so much :)

[Joe von Habsburg]

@Christian-Ehrlicher

I have another question. I received some times between ubuntu and windows (65ms). Everything is ok. But, sometimes windows rising 350ms for one packet. In ubuntu just max 80ms.

QByteArray DataReceiver::getData(int port)
{
    QString url = QString("http://localhost:%1/sample").arg(port);
    _apiUrl.setUrl(url);
    _request.setUrl(_apiUrl);
    _reply = _manager.get(_request);
    connect(_reply, &QNetworkReply::finished, &_loop, &QEventLoop::quit);
    _loop.exec();
    if (_reply->error() == QNetworkReply::NoError) {
        QByteArray responseData = _reply->readAll();
        _reply->deleteLater();
        return responseData;
    } else {
        QString _error = tr("Error");
        QString _spectrum_error = tr("Spectrum error.");
        QMessageBox::critical(nullptr, _error, _spectrum_error);
        stop();
    }
    _reply->deleteLater();
    return NULL;
}

Do you know, why it's rising ? What can I do another, after take data ?

[Joe von Habsburg]

@Joe-von-Habsburg I found the reason. Thanks a lot :) <3

[Volker75]

@Joe-von-Habsburg And what was the reason? Windows defender?

[Joe von Habsburg]

@Volker75 said in Qt6 Windows slower than Qt6 Ubuntu:

And what was the reason? Windows defender?

another networkmanager.....

@Christian-Ehrlicher , @JonB , @jsulm

Hi guys, I need your help. When I run the my program (only data receive) after 30min, my ram will be 20gb. It's increase always. I tested it in Ubuntu and Windows and I saw same thing. What should I do after take data?

QByteArray DataReceiver::getData(int port)
{
    QString url = QString("http://localhost:%1/sample").arg(port);
    _apiUrl.setUrl(url);
    _request.setUrl(_apiUrl);
    reply = _manager.get(_request);
    connect(reply, &QNetworkReply::finished, &_loop, &QEventLoop::quit);
    _loop.exec();
    if (reply->error() == QNetworkReply::NoError) {
        QByteArray responseData = reply->readAll();
        reply->deleteLater();
        return  responseData;
    } else {
        QString _error = tr("Error");
        QString _spectrum_error = tr("Spectrum error.");
        QMessageBox::critical(nullptr, _error, _spectrum_error);
        stop();
    }
    reply->deleteLater();
    return {};
}

if I use my code like that :

QByteArray DataReceiver::getData(int port)
{
    QString url = QString("http://localhost:%1/sample").arg(port);
    QUrl _apiUrl(url);
    QNetworkRequest _request(_apiUrl);
    QEventLoop _loop;
    QNetworkAccessManager _manager;
    QNetworkReply *reply = _manager.get(_request);
    connect(reply, &QNetworkReply::finished, &_loop, &QEventLoop::quit);
    _loop.exec();
    if (reply->error() == QNetworkReply::NoError) {
        QByteArray responseData = reply->readAll();
        reply->deleteLater();
        return  responseData;
    } else {
        QString _error = tr("Error");
        QString _spectrum_error = tr("Spectrum error.");
        QMessageBox::critical(nullptr, _error, _spectrum_error);
        stop();
    }
    reply->deleteLater();
    return {};
}

Memory will not rise but response time slow....

[JonB]

@Joe-von-Habsburg
Is the difference due to the QNetworkAccessManager _manager; or to the QNetworkReply *reply = _manager.get(_request);?
In the bad case you might connect to reply->destroyed() to make sure it is indeed getting freed.

[Joe von Habsburg]

@JonB

According to my tests, if I rebuild the NetworkManager, my memory usage does not increase. But this time my receiving time is slowing down.

If I do not recreate the NetworkManager, my reception time decreases but memory usage increases.

connect(reply, &QNetworkReply::destroyed, this, &DataReceiver::replyDeleted);

it's work, reply deleted

[JonB]

@Joe-von-Habsburg
In that case please replace the second one's QNetworkReply *reply = _manager.get(_request); with the first one's reply = _manager.get(_request); (I assume reply is a member variable, this->reply) and confirm. Then the only difference is the local QNetworkAccessManager _manager versus a class member one.

[Joe von Habsburg]

@Joe-von-Habsburg said in Qt6 Windows slower than Qt6 Ubuntu:

connect(reply, &QNetworkReply::destroyed, this, &DataReceiver::replyDeleted);

sorry for that. this is work only when I stop my while loop. How can force it ?

@Joe-von-Habsburg said in Qt6 Windows slower than Qt6 Ubuntu:

 void DataReceiver::start()
 {
     _connection++;
     if(_connection > 1)
         return;
 
     qDebug() << "Starting take data";
     _takeData = true;
     while(_takeData){
         QDateTime time1 = QDateTime::currentDateTime();
         _sample = getData(54664);
         QDateTime time3 = QDateTime::currentDateTime();
         if(_takeIQData)
             _iq = getData(54665);
         QDateTime time2 = QDateTime::currentDateTime();
         qDebug() << "sample : " << time3 - time1 << " iq : " << time2 - time3 << "time :  << time2 - time1;
        emit sendData(_sample, _iq);
     }
     qDebug() << "Finished taking data";
 }

@JonB said in Qt6 Windows slower than Qt6 Ubuntu:

n that case please replace the second one's QNetworkReply *reply = _manager.get(_request); with the first one's reply = _manager.get(_request); (I assume reply is a member variable, this->reply) and confirm. Then the only difference is the local QNetworkAccessManager _manager versus a class member one.

I change it.
_reply and _manager class member now

QByteArray DataReceiver::getData(int port)
{
    QString url = QString("http://localhost:%1/sample").arg(port);
    QUrl _apiUrl(url);
    QNetworkRequest _request(_apiUrl);
    QEventLoop _loop;
    _reply = _manager.get(_request);
    connect(_reply, &QNetworkReply::finished, &_loop, &QEventLoop::quit);
    connect(_reply, &QNetworkReply::destroyed, this, &DataReceiver::replyDeleted);
    _loop.exec();
    if (_reply->error() == QNetworkReply::NoError) {
        QByteArray responseData = _reply->readAll();
        _reply->deleteLater();
        return  responseData;
    } else {
        QString _error = tr("Error");
        QString _spectrum_error = tr("Spectrum error.");
        QMessageBox::critical(nullptr, _error, _spectrum_error);
        stop();
    }
    _reply->deleteLater();
    return {};
}

The problem still exists.

I think lots of reply are created and they only delete I stop my loop.

[JonB]

@Joe-von-Habsburg said in Qt6 Windows slower than Qt6 Ubuntu:

I think lots of reply are created and they only delete I stop my loop.

I do not follow this. One reply per _manager.get(_request), and you have checked that is getting destroyed.

Supposedly, the only difference now is that in good case you create and destroy a local QNetworkAccessManager _manager each time (hence slower) while in bad case you reuse member variable. Right?

In that case can only suggest you try playing with stuff to see if it makes any difference in the bad case. QNAM has a couple of caches you can clear (see docs), try those. Try calling its setAutoDeleteReplies(true). Try making the member variable a QNetworkAccessManager *_manager which you new and deleteLater() or delete and instead create a new one in the member variable each time its destroyed for use next time. That would "emulate" having it as a local variable which gets automatically created & destroyed in the good case.

Other than that I am out of ideas. maybe someone expert will comment.