Hi
I'm trying to add nodes to a path, but for some reason, I can only add one, by double-clicking on the path. After I add that 1st node, no other nodes can be added. Why?

I've tried selecting one of the segments created after I add that 1st node, then clicking Add Node button on the tool control bar. But it adds the node exactly in the center of the segment, not where I want it.

The path where I want to add more nodes is NOW a closed path. But it started out to be many segments or open paths, which I combined together into one. Does that have something to do with why I can't add more nodes? This particular section started out as an ellipse. I selected the 2 nodes on the long ends of the ellipse, and clicked "Split path between 2 non-endnodes" to create an arc. Then I combined it with already existing paths which closed the path.

Or is this another case where you'd have to see what I'm working on?
Thanks for your help

Hmm I think I have an idea what you mean but if you could show an example it would really help.

So is it definitely a path and not an object? (Click on it an go to Path>Object to Path to be sure).
I can't see any reason why you shouldn't be able to add nodes by selecting two nodes and then pressing the add node button. Does that work?

I can't see any reason why you shouldn't be able to add nodes by selecting two nodes and then pressing the add node button. Does that work?

Yes, but it adds the node at the midpoint of the segment, which is not where I want it. And I'm not sure enough with the mouse to move it to where I want it, without distorting it.

I'm sure it's a path. As I said, I combined it with other paths. And I think you can't combine an object to a path, can you?

[Edit] Ok, I tried Object to Path, but it said, No object to convert to path, or something close to that.

I might also add that I can create a brand new path, and add nodes to my heart's content! So I'm sure it's something I've done in my work on this image, which is causing me not to be able to add more than one node. I just don't know what it is...

Well, the problem seems to have resolved now. And I don't know any more why it's resolved than what caused it to begin with. But I have a theory.

One problem I've been having with v 0.46 is how SLOW it works. For example, zooming -- in v 0.44, I can only tap the mouse over the zoom buttons because it's so fast. But in 0.46, I have to sit on the zoom buttons for several seconds for a comparable amount of zoom. Another example, when I click the Undo button, there's a delay of a few seconds, before I see whatever I had done get undone. I haven't actually timed it, but it's quite a noticeable delay. Often I click a 2nd time, thinking the 1st one didn't "take", only to have both clicks work at once, and undo an extra step. And I have to say I'm surprised, because I'm running 1.25 gigs of RAM. So it should really snap to.

Anyway, I use a touchpad mouse, and have the 3rd mouse button set to double-click. Even though using my double-click button has sufficed for adding nodes in the past, I'm wondering if this delay that I see in v 0.46 is having some weird affect on the speed of double-click needed by Inkscape. So that maybe whatever double-click speed I have my mouse set to is either too fast or too slow for what Inkscape needs to register a double click.

What led me to wonder about this, is that in this example, when I became able to add nodes as usual, I noticed an overall increase in responsiveness. That's how it seems to go, things get slower and slower, then all of a sudden, response time goes back to normal, usually for just a moment or 2, then it slows down again. And just to be clear, this is NOT a system-wide affect -- it's only with Inkscape, and only with Inkscape 4.6 (not 4.4).

So I guess all I can do is be alert, and report when I have new info about it. Has this kind of problem been reported with 0.46?

WHOA!!
I opened my Task Manager, to find out if I might learn more info there. Any time I click on the Inkscape canvas, CPU use by Inkscape.exe goes from 00 up to the 70 - 80% range. Double-clicking it maxes out the CPU!

So it's not an issue of double-clicking speed at all. Instead, it looks like the CPU is maxing out, and probably freezing up my system for....well, some tiny amount. It doesn't really matter how long, because once the CPU is maxed out, it prevents Inkscape from carrying out the double-click.

So this is INDEED a problem! Maybe I'll search the Bugs forum over at SourceForge, while I'm waiting for a reply here. Also, I'll edit the title of this topic, because it's not really an issue with nodes, directly.

Can anyone share any info on this? Has anyone else reported it?
Thank you for your help

brynn wrote:One problem I've been having with v 0.46 is how SLOW it works. For example, zooming -- in v 0.44, I can only tap the mouse over the zoom buttons because it's so fast. But in 0.46, I have to sit on the zoom buttons for several seconds for a comparable amount of zoom.

I don't know why that should be. Maybe the zoom increment has changed. But if you want to zoom in or out a large amount, isn't it easier to use the + and - keys anyway?

I opened my Task Manager, to find out if I might learn more info there. Any time I click on the Inkscape canvas, CPU use by Inkscape.exe goes from 00 up to the 70 - 80% range. Double-clicking it maxes out the CPU!

I can't reproduce that. It mostly just sits at 0% no matter how much I click. It does occasionally go up to 5% for some reason, but no higher.

Maybe I'll search the Bugs forum over at SourceForge

It's at Launchpad now.

Can anyone share any info on this? Has anyone else reported it?

High CPU usage when moving the mouse about the canvas is a known problem (bug 167525) going back to before Inkscape 0.44. But I've never heard of high CPU usage when just clicking.

Hi again,
I hesitated to report this problem as a bug, after I 1st discovered it, because it wasn't clear enough to me, that it might actually be a bug. But I've been continuing to use v 0.46 while watching my Task Manager, and want to report what more I've learned.

I'm still having the same issue of the CPU maxing out at 100% and freezing my system, by Inkscape (0.46) alone. It tends to happen more often, and last longer, at higher zoom factors. I've noticed that gradients tend to magnify the effect, and the more gradients, the higher cpu use. The same with layers, although additional layers seem not to have as strong an influence as gradients. Also, additional....I'm not sure the right terminology here, but my best guess is "Z Layers" (as opposed to regular Layers). The more "Z Layers", the stronger the effect. I have not been able to determine whether regular Layers or Z Layers have the stronger influence, but gradients are stronger than either type of Layers.

I've also learned that this effect is stronger when I'm viewing an area on the canvas which contains images (or portions thereof). So for example, working an an image with a lot of gradients, and having trouble with this issue, I've found that if I scroll to an empty area of canvas, that I can zoom without limitations. But when I try to scroll back onto the image, scrolling is painfully slow. However, zooming with the image in view is MUCH slower than scrolling with the image in view. Also, if it's not clear by what I've said so far, this effect is less strong when images (or portions of) with fewer layers and/or gradients are in the viewing area. So the effect is not across the board, it depends on the complexity of what's in the viewing area. Also, this problem seems to get worse, the longer I work on an image. Often, I can Save and close the window, then open it up again, and have a faster response.

Further, I've learned that I can ease this issue somewhat, by closing visibility of layers that I don't need for the particular thing I'm doing on the canvas. As I mentioned already, reducing the zoom factor will also ease matters. So that if I can't add nodes by double-clicking, or am unable to do something, I can close unneeded layers, and/or zoom out, until the double-click (or whatever) will work. So far, I've been able to work around this, but a situation where I need a high zoom to properly position a node, or do something which the higher zoom prevents (by using too much memory), could easily present itself.

I've found I can also somewhat improve this issue by closing programs which tend to use more memory, which of course frees up more for Inkscape to use. I think I noted this in a previous reply, but I'm running 1.24 GIGs of RAM, which makes this issue nearly inconceivable to me. FYI, another InkscapeForum user has recently reported this same issue (viewtopic.php?f=29&t=1151). However, they report their memory at 768 MB, and note their (presumably) highest CPU use by Inkscape at 72%.

Aside from being incredibly annoying, my concern is that I''m NOT a graphic artist, and thus far can only work on simple images. I'm still very much in the process of learning how to use Inkscape, and have not attempted anything too complex. I have to imagine seasoned Inkscape users are capable of creating much more complex images. So in addition to my 1.25 GIGs, I'm not in a position to really create such a problem by making very complex images.

So I'm still not sure if this behavior is within the realm of possibility for Inkscape, or if it's serious enough to submit a bug report. It's certainly bothersome enough, lol. But I'm not sure if it's expected, or possibly has a solution. What do you all think?

FYI, when this problem is happening, at worse, I wait between 1 and 2 minutes for a page up or down scroll. A single click on the up or down arrow, still takes nearly a minute. Zooming is nearly impossible, and again, I wait 1 to 2 minutes for a single click on the zoom button (bottom right corner) -- not holding down the button, just a click. If I hold down the zoom button, I can easily wait 5 minutes for the request to be completed. (Well actually, at worse, my system is frozen and I can't do anything, but it only lasts for a moment or 2 -- so I guess the aformentioned is how bad it gets just before my system freezes.)

For further comparison, the image I've been working on, as I've been observing this issue, has 15 regular Layers. On average, I would say each regular Layer has 2 Z Layers (some 1, some 3). It has 15 to 20 gradients, and admitedly, were I more experienced, I probably could have done what I want with fewer gradients. Also, because I'm still struggling to learn gradients, there are several I made, that I ended up not using. I'm not sure if they are counted in the memory, or would affect this issue. The other user I mentioned above, who is having this problem, noted the problem with a lot of clones. I have not used Clones, but have used Duplicate a lot. I haven't really set up a situation where I can compare the use of Duplicates and Clones as far as memory use. So anyway, I'm not sure if Duplicates should matter, but I mention it just in case. Um, I believe the canvas is the B8 size ~~ smaller than 500 x 400 px in any case. (And of course I can look up the exact size, if it matters.)

Also, I'm using Windows XP SP 2 (soon to be SP 3). I have something like 20 gigs free of hard drive memory and 1.25 gigs RAM. I couldn't say what kind of RAM I have, but could probably look it up, if it matters. Could the page file memory be causing this, or have any potential for solving it? I guess I don't understand the page file memory very well. Is there any other aspect of memory which might be useful to note. Most of the data presented in the Task Manager I don't understand. But could it be helpful to look more closely at some of it?

So what do you all think? Is this expected behavior? Does it rise to the level of bug submission? Is there anything else I can do, besides what I've mentioned already (close other programs, close layers, zoom out, etc.) to either ease or solve the problem? Bug potential aside, this problem is quite annoying!

Thank you very much for your time and attention to this issue. I really appreciate your help. I'm glad to contribute whatever I can, as far as submitting a bug. But I wouldn't want to burden the process with a non-issue, either.

13 paragraphs is too much for me to read I skimmed over it--perhaps you can post your drawing online so others can see if they have the same problem.