<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">One simple reason, HFR calculations. They are very computation intensive. If you want the HFR, it takes much longer<br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Nov 10, 2020, at 9:04 AM, Eric Dejouhanet <<a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" class="">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div id="response_container_BBPPID" dir="auto" contenteditable="false" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: initial; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration: none; outline: none;" class=""><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width: 1013px;" class="">On my system, as an end-user, I don't understand why the star detection takes less than a second in the alignment module (SmallScaleSolving), and more than twenty in the Focus module (tweaked version of SmallSizedStars).</div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width: 1013px;" class=""><br class=""></div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width: 1013px;" class="">So I did configure Focus to use the SmallScaleSolving settings from the Align module. I used the CCD Simulator to send one of my NGC6888 frames to Focus, and ran a capture. The Focus module took FIVE minutes to detect 29 stars. I thought the whole thing was crashed. </div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width: 1013px;" class=""><span style="font-family: initial; font-size: initial;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width: 1013px;" class=""><span style="font-family: initial; font-size: initial;" class="">The Align module took FOUR seconds with the same configuration on the same 31MB frame to detect 50+ stars. It said it wasn't parallel by itself. It did a downsample by 3.</span></div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width: 1013px;" class=""><span style="font-family: initial; font-size: initial;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width: 1013px;" class=""><span style="font-family: initial; font-size: initial;" class="">So this is probably not a question of detection, there is another culprit somewhere. During the execution of the Focus detection, the cpu wasn't 100%. </span></div><div id="blackberry_signature_BBPPID" name="BB10" dir="auto" class=""><div id="_signaturePlaceholder_BBPPID" name="BB10" dir="auto" class=""><p dir="ltr" class=""><a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" class="">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>-<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://astronomy.dejouha.net/" class="">https://astronomy.dejouha.net</a></p></div></div></div><div id="_original_msg_header_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration: none;" class=""><table width="100%" contenteditable="false" style="border-spacing: 0px; display: table; outline: none;" class=""><tbody class=""><tr class=""><td colspan="2" style="font-size: initial; text-align: initial;" class=""><div style="border-style: solid none none; border-top-width: 1pt; border-top-color: rgb(181, 196, 223); padding: 3pt 0in 0in; font-family: Tahoma, "BB Alpha Sans", "Slate Pro"; font-size: 10pt;" class=""><div id="from" class=""><b class="">De:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de" class="">sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de</a></div><div id="sent" class=""><b class="">Envoyé:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>10 novembre 2020 14:03</div><div id="to" class=""><b class="">À:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:mutlaqja@ikarustech.com" class="">mutlaqja@ikarustech.com</a></div><div id="cc" class=""><b class="">Cc:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:hy@murveit.com" class="">hy@murveit.com</a>; <a href="mailto:rlancaste@gmail.com" class="">rlancaste@gmail.com</a>; <a href="mailto:kstars-devel@kde.org" class="">kstars-devel@kde.org</a>; <a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" class="">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a></div><div id="subject" class=""><b class="">Objet:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: KStars v3.5.0 Release Date?</div></div></td></tr></tbody></table><br class=""></div><div name="BB10" dir="auto" contenteditable="false" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration: none; line-height: initial; outline: none;" class=""><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;"></div>OK, I did a quick check on my RPi4 with Parallel Algorithm set to „Auto“ - and it works super fast! But since it is daytime, I can only test the „Load and Slew“ option. So maybe the WCS info in the file gave hints that are not present for normal capture and slew or sync.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I need to check it under real conditions, which might be tricky due to the fog hanging around here…</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Wolfgang<div class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Am 10.11.2020 um 11:16 schrieb Jasem Mutlaq <<a href="mailto:mutlaqja@ikarustech.com" class="">mutlaqja@ikarustech.com</a>>:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Alright, let's look at this:<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">1. Parallel algorithm: This is related to SOLVER, not image partitioning. It should work fine on Rpi4 and the checks are more reliable now as Robert worked on that.</div><div class="">2. WCS Polar Align: Can this be reproduced with simulators?</div><div class=""><br clear="all" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="">--</div><div class="">Best Regards,<br class="">Jasem Mutlaq<br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></div></div></div><br class=""></div></div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 10:48 AM Wolfgang Reissenberger <<a href="mailto:sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de" class="">sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="">It wasn’t that bad. The problem was that KStars went to 100% CPU usage and died (or I killed it, do not exactly remember). I’ll try to reproduce it...<br class=""><div class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Am 10.11.2020 um 08:45 schrieb Hy Murveit <<a href="mailto:murveit@gmail.com" class="">murveit@gmail.com</a>>:</div><br class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">OK, well I believe it was fixed a week ago, so if you can still recreate it, you should report it. <div class="">It should be fixed before release if it is still freezing the Pi.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Hy</div></div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 11:42 PM Wolfgang Reissenberger <<a href="mailto:sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de" class="">sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="">OK, I have to check it. The problem occurred only a few days ago and I think I’m always on bleeding edge...<br class=""><div class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Am 10.11.2020 um 08:38 schrieb Hy Murveit <<a href="mailto:murveit@gmail.com" class="">murveit@gmail.com</a>>:</div><br class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Wolfgang: I believe Rob and/or Jasem fixed the issue with parallel algorithm bringing down the RPi4 a while back.<div class="">I have the solver on auto parallelism and load all indexes in memory, and it seems to work fine (and in parallel).</div><div class="">Similarly, for star extraction, Jasem implemented a threaded extraction that also automatically determines how many threads to use and seems fine on the RPi4.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Eric: I believe these parallel options are the defaults. Hopefully users won't need to configure things like this.</div><div class="">For star detection, I don't believe you can turn it off.</div><div class="">For star detection Jasem split the frame before detection (into at most num-threads parts--4 for the RPi4).</div><div class="">For align, I'm not sure how Rob divided things.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Hy</div></div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 11:07 PM Wolfgang Reissenberger <<a href="mailto:sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de" class="">sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="">Hi all,<div class="">I think we are close to finishing the release. I personally would opt to wait for another week and keep an eye stability.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Maybe we should take another look if the default settings in the StellarSolver profiles work a) for typical camera/scope combinations and b) for all platforms.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">For example with my RPi, I needed to change the Parallel Algorithm to „None“ because parallelity brought KStars down. Is the default setting „None“ and I changed it somewhen? With all the new parameters I would prefer having a robust setup and leave it to the user to optimize speed.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">@Jasem: please take a closer look to MR!122, since it fixed 4(!) regressions I introduced with my capture counting fix MR!114. Hopefully now we have at least a proper coverage with automated tests...</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Wolfgang</div><div class=""><div class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Am<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="tel:09112020" class="">09.11.2020</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>um 22:04 schrieb Jasem Mutlaq <<a href="mailto:mutlaqja@ikarustech.com" class="">mutlaqja@ikarustech.com</a>>:</div><br class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Hello Folks,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">So back to this topic, any major blockers to the KStars 3.5.0 release now?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">1. Remote Solver should be fixed now.</div><div class="">2. StellarSolver Profiles are more optimized now.</div><div class="">3. Handbook not updated yet, but we can probably work on this shortly.</div><div class="">4. Couple of pending MRs to take care of.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">How about Friday the 13th?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="">--</div><div class="">Best Regards,<br class="">Jasem Mutlaq<br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></div></div></div><br class=""></div></div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 3:41 AM Robert Lancaster <<a href="mailto:rlancaste@gmail.com" class="">rlancaste@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">Hi Eric,<br class=""><br class="">Ok so then we would be changing the way we do version numbering with this, right?<br class="">I believe now we typically add features in each new iteration 3.4.1, 3.4.2, etc etc<br class="">and when it is really big like StellarSolver, then we make it a big release like 3.5.0<br class=""><br class="">With this new paradigm, we wouldn’t put new features into the master of the main 3.5 branch<br class="">But instead we would work on a new 3.6 branch, and then bug fixes would go into the 3.5 branch<br class="">to make each new minor release, like 3.5.1, 3.5.2 etc.<br class=""><br class="">Do I have this correct?<br class=""><br class="">If this is right, then it would be longer before users see new features in the main branch, but the<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">tradeoff is that the main branch would have a LOT more stability. I see this as a big positive.<br class=""><br class="">Thanks,<br class=""><br class="">Rob<br class=""><br class="">> On Nov 4, 2020, at 5:54 PM, Eric Dejouhanet <<a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" class="">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">> Hello Hy,<br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">> Version 3.5.0 is only the beginning of the 3.5.x series, with more<br class="">> bugfixes on each iteration (and possibly, only bugfixes).<br class="">> So I have no problem leaving unresolved issues in 3.5.0.<br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">> For instance, the Focus module now has a slight and unforeseeable<br class="">> delay after the capture completes.<br class="">> The UI reflects the end of the capture only, not the end of the detection.<br class="">> This makes the UI Focus test quite difficult to tweak, as running an<br class="">> average of the HFR over multiple frames now has an unknown duration.<br class="">> Right now, the test is trying to click the capture button too soon 2<br class="">> out of 10 attempts.<br class="">> But this won't block 3.5 in my opinion (and now that I understood the<br class="">> problem, I won't work on it immediately).<br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">> In terms of reporting problems, the official way is stil<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://bugs.kde.org/" class="">bugs.kde.org</a>,<br class="">> but there's quite a cleanup/followup to do there.<br class="">> I'd say we can use issues in<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://invent.kde.org/" class="">invent.kde.org</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>to discuss planned<br class="">> development around a forum/bugzilla issue or invent proposal (like<br class="">> agile stories).<br class="">> There are milestones associated with several issues (although I think<br class="">> they should be reviewed and postponed).<br class="">> And we can certainly write a punchlist: check the board at<br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://invent.kde.org/education/kstars/-/milestones/3" class="">https://invent.kde.org/education/kstars/-/milestones/3</a><br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">> Le mer. 4 nov. 2020 à 22:38, Hy Murveit <<a href="mailto:murveit@gmail.com" class="">murveit@gmail.com</a>> a écrit :<br class="">>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>> Eric,<br class="">>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>> I would add to your list:<br class="">>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>> - KStars Handbook (review update sections to reflect 3.5.0) and finally (perhaps manually if necessary) put the latest handbook online.<br class="">>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>> - Review the extraction settings. I spent a bit of time looking at the default HFR settings, and based on some experimentation (truth be told, with a limited amount of data) adjust things a little differently than my first guess (which was basically focus' settings).<br class="">>> Rob: My intuition is that I should adjust the default StellarSolver star-extraction settings for Focus and Guide as well in<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><wbr class=""><a href="http://stellarsolverprofile.cpp/" class="">stellarsolverprofile.cpp</a><wbr class="">. I don't know whether you've already verified them, and want to release them as they are, or whether they are a first shot and you'd welcome adjustment?<br class="">>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>> Also, Eric, I suppose I should be adding these things here:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://invent.kde.org/education/kstars/-/issues" class="">https://invent.kde.org/education/kstars/-/issues</a><br class="">>> Is that right? Sorry about that--ok, after this thread ;) But seriously, your email is a good summary, and from that link<br class="">>> it doesn't seem as easy to see which are "must do by 3.5.0" and which are "nice to have someday".<br class="">>> A 3.5.0 punchlist would be a nice thing to have.<br class="">>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>> Hy<br class="">>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 12:58 PM Eric Dejouhanet <<a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" class="">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class="">>>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>>> Hello,<br class="">>>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>>> Where do we stand now in terms of bugfixing towards 3.5.0?<br class="">>>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>>> - StellarSolver has all features in, and 1.5 is finally out at Jasem's PPA.<br class="">>>> - However Gitlab CI still complains about that lib package (see<br class="">>>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://invent.kde.org/education/kstars/-/jobs/75941" class="">https://invent.kde.org/education/kstars/-/jobs/75941</a>)<br class="">>>> - Unitary tests are being fixed progressively, mount tests are down to<br class="">>>> ~20 minutes (yeees!)<br class="">>>> - From my tests, the remote Astrometry INDI driver is not usable<br class="">>>> anymore from Ekos.<br class="">>>> - The issue raised with flat frames is confirmed fixed (at least by me).<br class="">>>> - Meridian flip is OK (but I had not enough time to test TWO flips in a row).<br class="">>>> - Memory leaks are still being researched in Ekos.<br class="">>>> - There is an issue when duplicating an entry in a scheduler job,<br class="">>>> where the sequence associated is copied from the next job.<br class="">>>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>>> Could we get a 3.6 branch where we will merge development of new features?<br class="">>>> And master for bugfixing 3.5.x until we merge 3.6 new features in?<br class="">>>> (we'd still have to port bugfixes from master to 3.6)<br class="">>>> I don't think the opposite, master for 3.6 and a separate living<br class="">>>> 3.5.x, is doable in the current configuration (build, ppas, MRs...).<br class="">>>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">>>> --<br class="">>>> --<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" class="">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>-<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://astronomy.dejouha.net/" class="">https://astronomy.dejouha.net</a><br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">> --<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">> --<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" class="">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>-<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://astronomy.dejouha.net/" class="">https://astronomy.dejouha.net</a><br class=""><br class=""></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>