# Interface is slow when running textcat recipe **URL:** \ **Category:** Uncategorized\ **Tags:** usage, textcat, front-end\ **Created:** [August 5, 2022, 9:44pm UTC](https://support.prodi.gy/t/interface-is-slow-when-running-textcat-recipe/5846 "2022-08-05T21:44:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![hamt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ad7895/32.png) [@hamt](https://support.prodi.gy/u/hamt)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 9:44pm UTC](https://support.prodi.gy/t/interface-is-slow-when-running-textcat-recipe/5846/1 "2022-08-05T21:44:20Z")
I have been noticing our prodigy interface has become slower recently. We recently ran a few textcat sessions and there’s usually a delay on the interface whenever we hit accept and this delay seems to be proportional to the length of the texts in the dataset and increase as we label more examples for that set. This didn’t happen earlier- datasets of a size that seemed to not cause any noticeable lag a couple months go are now causing up to 15 seconds of lag every time we hit accept on an example. - We are using the textcat recipe - We currently have 121 datasets in the prodigy db, some for ner, most for textcat. - The texts are about 600 words on average - The actual size of the prodigy sqlite db is just 412 MB Any ideas on what might be happening and what we can do to fix this? ---
**Author:** ![ryanwesslen](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/support.prodi.gy/ryanwesslen/32/2969_2.png) [@ryanwesslen](https://support.prodi.gy/u/ryanwesslen)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2022, 8:13pm UTC](https://support.prodi.gy/t/interface-is-slow-when-running-textcat-recipe/5846/2 "2022-08-07T20:13:28Z")
hi @hamt! Thanks for your message and welcome to the community 👋 Have you tried or can you try [logging](https://prodi.gy/docs/install#debugging-logging)? If so, can you tell which steps are taking most of the time? You can try by prefixing your commands: ```bash PRODIGY_LOGGING=basic python -m prodigy ... ``` You can also use `verbose` instead of `basic` to get even more details. What recipes are you running? It seems like the issue is with annotation, not training. Any problems with training? Also, are you using any active learning? Also, some recipes (e.g., `relations`) do have some issues with larger text (500+ words or more). I do think in general shorter text is better. Here's one set of tips to split up your tasks: > [@Prodigy is slow at loading annotations](https://support.prodi.gy/t/prodigy-is-slow-at-loading-annotations/4466/4): > > One option could be to split your JSONL into smaller files, yes. Once you're done with file 1, you can start at file 2, and if you ever restart the server, it'll only have to go through the examples in that file again. The hackier version of this would be to just remove all lines from the top of your JSONL that you know are already annotated in the data. Also, if you want to really optimize for processing performance, another option could be to do the pre-processing separately, e.g. have a scr… ---
**Author:** ![hamt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ad7895/32.png) [@hamt](https://support.prodi.gy/u/hamt)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2022, 3:00pm UTC](https://support.prodi.gy/t/interface-is-slow-when-running-textcat-recipe/5846/3 "2022-08-08T15:00:13Z")
Hi Ryan, Sorry, I think I found the problem and it turned out to be an issue on my end. Every step being logged seems to be pretty quick, but more time is being eaten up on the front end whenever I move to the next example. I'm using a custom js for textcat that highlights some key words on the frontend to make it a bit easier. I can confirm removing the words to highlights reduces the lag. What really is odd is that when we started using the custom js, there was no lag and it slowly started increasing with no change to the code or keywords, it worse when we had multiple people doing the labeling, and improved a bit when we just restarted the server we were running it on. So I assumed it was a backend issue. I think I'll have to look more carefully at this, but any idea why these problems might arise just from some custom frontend js code? Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![ryanwesslen](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/support.prodi.gy/ryanwesslen/32/2969_2.png) [@ryanwesslen](https://support.prodi.gy/u/ryanwesslen)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2022, 2:15pm UTC](https://support.prodi.gy/t/interface-is-slow-when-running-textcat-recipe/5846/4 "2022-08-12T14:15:06Z")
Hi @hamt! I'm glad to hear that you're getting a little closer to diagnosing the problem. > [@hamt](#): > > any idea why these problems might arise just from some custom frontend js code? That's a bit challenging without seeing the full code and/or logs. You're welcome to provide more snippets of either, but I understand if you don't want to publicly share them. Especially a small reproducible example of your javascript would be the most important. Two high level questions: 1. What version of prodigy are you running? (e.g., run `prodigy stats`) 2. How are you setting up multiple annotators and/or are they annotating concurrently on the same task? Typically, there are two options for [multi-user sessions](https://prodi.gy/docs/api-web-app#multi-user-sessions): unique session ids or unique port/datasets. Here's a bit of a background on both: > [@Help - Multiple Annotators setup](https://support.prodi.gy/t/help-multiple-annotators-setup/3343/4): > > Ah, sorry if the terminology I used was confusing! What I meant was the session/instance/process. There are generally two ways you could set this up and it depends on your project, annotators and how you want to set up the workflow: Start one Prodigy process one a given host/port per annotator and save the annotations to separate datasets. For example, on port 8080, you start the Prodigy server with 100 documents and save to annotations\_andrew, on port 8081 you start Prodigy with the next 100 … Since it's sounding like a front-end/javascript issue, I don't suspect it is a feed issue. But since you notice more issues when multiple users are annotating, I'm not ruling it out. Feel free to add any additional things you've learned or things you think may be relevant.