You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com> on 2012/12/10 19:00:14 UTC
CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
> I think it was a plug-in that fed results to a reporting infrastructure.
I'm not so sure we need it but we could try to get it donated.
I comeback on that because it would be nice to be able to test the perfs on
parts of the framework but I noticed that not all the framework/tests
directory has been donated and notably, the performance one.
Will it be donated ?
- Fred
-----Message d'origine-----
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 4:33 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
On 6/21/12 6:35 AM, "Dirk Eismann" <bo...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> During my experiments with the current i18n implementation in the SDK
> I noticed that the current Apache Flex source does not include the
> mx.utils.PerfUtil class (referenced from within a conditional
> compilation block in mx.resources,ResourceManager) while the Adobe
> Flex SDK 4.6 does include this. Seems as if was something internally
> used by Adobe that never got never included in a release SDK.
>
> Out of interest: what was it used for and why was is removed?
I think it was a plug-in that fed results to a reporting infrastructure.
I'm not so sure we need it but we could try to get it donated.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
Hi Alex,
> If we see activity in that area, then we can decide on whether it will be
less time to create our own perf suite within the constraints of Apache or
go through the hassle of getting these tests donated and separated from
their server dependencies.
I can only try to figure out how it is a painfull work, but I trust you :)
The point creating our own perf suite is to not enter in a legal problem if
we use an approach in something similar at the Adobe's one.
> AFAIK, ASF does not supply separate servers. Everything is shared. I'm
seriously considering buying my own computers to run CI.
Funny, I've got 3 computers at home and tought the same thing.
We burned out at least two engineers trying to create an automated perf
suite. I was not involved. But from the email trail, it was not a smooth
process.
> From what I understood, they were trying to do a dashbord (html based) but
> what we need could be an automatic email to this list for example for
> which, the PerfSubmitter could be a good base IMO
-----Message d'origine-----
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 5:34 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
On 12/11/12 12:56 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't know what kinds of changes folks have planned for the current
>> Flex
> SDK code, but other than the CSS perf fix, I haven't seen too many other
> things that would make getting this stuff through an audit a priority.
>
> It's not a priority but that gonna become usefull especialy when we gonna
> try to optimize UIComponent and other pieces of the SDK
If we see activity in that area, then we can decide on whether it will be
less time to create our own perf suite within the constraints of Apache or
go through the hassle of getting these tests donated and separated from
their server dependencies.
>
>> The problem with any perf suite that runs on people's computers is the
> possibility of variances between runs that are unrelated to the code
> changes.
>
> You right, do you think ASF can provide this kind of computer ? we don't
> even need a powerfull one but just one to serve as baseline.
AFAIK, ASF does not supply separate servers. Everything is shared. I'm
seriously considering buying my own computers to run CI.
>
>> I think we had a dedicated sandboxed computer for official testing
> at Adobe.
>
> You haven't see it ?
We burned out at least two engineers trying to create an automated perf
suite. I was not involved. But from the email trail, it was not a smooth
process.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 12/11/12 12:56 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't know what kinds of changes folks have planned for the current Flex
> SDK code, but other than the CSS perf fix, I haven't seen too many other
> things that would make getting this stuff through an audit a priority.
>
> It's not a priority but that gonna become usefull especialy when we gonna
> try to optimize UIComponent and other pieces of the SDK
If we see activity in that area, then we can decide on whether it will be
less time to create our own perf suite within the constraints of Apache or
go through the hassle of getting these tests donated and separated from
their server dependencies.
>
>> The problem with any perf suite that runs on people's computers is the
> possibility of variances between runs that are unrelated to the code
> changes.
>
> You right, do you think ASF can provide this kind of computer ? we don't
> even need a powerfull one but just one to serve as baseline.
AFAIK, ASF does not supply separate servers. Everything is shared. I'm
seriously considering buying my own computers to run CI.
>
>> I think we had a dedicated sandboxed computer for official testing
> at Adobe.
>
> You haven't see it ?
We burned out at least two engineers trying to create an automated perf
suite. I was not involved. But from the email trail, it was not a smooth
process.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
> I don't know what kinds of changes folks have planned for the current Flex
SDK code, but other than the CSS perf fix, I haven't seen too many other
things that would make getting this stuff through an audit a priority.
It's not a priority but that gonna become usefull especialy when we gonna
try to optimize UIComponent and other pieces of the SDK
> The problem with any perf suite that runs on people's computers is the
possibility of variances between runs that are unrelated to the code
changes.
You right, do you think ASF can provide this kind of computer ? we don't
even need a powerfull one but just one to serve as baseline.
> I think we had a dedicated sandboxed computer for official testing
at Adobe.
You haven't see it ?
- Fred
Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
I don't know what kinds of changes folks have planned for the current Flex
SDK code, but other than the CSS perf fix, I haven't seen too many other
things that would make getting this stuff through an audit a priority.
The problem with any perf suite that runs on people's computers is the
possibility of variances between runs that are unrelated to the code
changes. I think we had a dedicated sandboxed computer for official testing
at Adobe.
On 12/10/12 7:04 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> And I didn't say that was for Apache but more for committers, when someone
> tells you what he did breaks performences, I want to be able to demostrated
> too
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> From: Frédéric THOMAS
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 3:46 AM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
>
> PerfSubmitter probably talks to an Adobe thing and I'm pretty sure that's
> private too but I'd like to be able to develop the same class without doing
> a war with Adobe's legals, that's my point.
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> From: Alex Harui
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 8:07 PM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
>
>
>
>
> On 12/10/12 10:00 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I think it was a plug-in that fed results to a reporting infrastructure.
>> I'm not so sure we need it but we could try to get it donated.
>>
>> I comeback on that because it would be nice to be able to test the perfs
>> on
>> parts of the framework but I noticed that not all the framework/tests
>> directory has been donated and notably, the performance one.
>>
>> Will it be donated ?
> We can look into it, but I'm not sure it is worth the effort. I think it
> plugged into a server-based reporting infrastructure that we have no way to
> replicate in Apache, and it certainly didn't catch some of the issues that
> folks are trying to fix now, plus performance on individual machines varies
> widely.
>
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
And I didn't say that was for Apache but more for committers, when someone
tells you what he did breaks performences, I want to be able to demostrated
too
-----Message d'origine-----
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 3:46 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
PerfSubmitter probably talks to an Adobe thing and I'm pretty sure that's
private too but I'd like to be able to develop the same class without doing
a war with Adobe's legals, that's my point.
-----Message d'origine-----
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 8:07 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
On 12/10/12 10:00 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I think it was a plug-in that fed results to a reporting infrastructure.
> I'm not so sure we need it but we could try to get it donated.
>
> I comeback on that because it would be nice to be able to test the perfs
> on
> parts of the framework but I noticed that not all the framework/tests
> directory has been donated and notably, the performance one.
>
> Will it be donated ?
We can look into it, but I'm not sure it is worth the effort. I think it
plugged into a server-based reporting infrastructure that we have no way to
replicate in Apache, and it certainly didn't catch some of the issues that
folks are trying to fix now, plus performance on individual machines varies
widely.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
PerfSubmitter probably talks to an Adobe thing and I'm pretty sure that's
private too but I'd like to be able to develop the same class without doing
a war with Adobe's legals, that's my point.
-----Message d'origine-----
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 8:07 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
On 12/10/12 10:00 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I think it was a plug-in that fed results to a reporting infrastructure.
> I'm not so sure we need it but we could try to get it donated.
>
> I comeback on that because it would be nice to be able to test the perfs
> on
> parts of the framework but I noticed that not all the framework/tests
> directory has been donated and notably, the performance one.
>
> Will it be donated ?
We can look into it, but I'm not sure it is worth the effort. I think it
plugged into a server-based reporting infrastructure that we have no way to
replicate in Apache, and it certainly didn't catch some of the issues that
folks are trying to fix now, plus performance on individual machines varies
widely.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CONFIG::performanceInstrumentation / PerfUtil?
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 12/10/12 10:00 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I think it was a plug-in that fed results to a reporting infrastructure.
> I'm not so sure we need it but we could try to get it donated.
>
> I comeback on that because it would be nice to be able to test the perfs on
> parts of the framework but I noticed that not all the framework/tests
> directory has been donated and notably, the performance one.
>
> Will it be donated ?
We can look into it, but I'm not sure it is worth the effort. I think it
plugged into a server-based reporting infrastructure that we have no way to
replicate in Apache, and it certainly didn't catch some of the issues that
folks are trying to fix now, plus performance on individual machines varies
widely.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui