[Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH v5 sugar] Pulsing icon delayed by 5 seconds or so SL#2080
anurag at seeta.in
Thu Oct 28 11:57:18 EDT 2010
I have attached the pulsingicon.py file in which I placed the
benchmark script to test the time taken by update function everytime
it is called.
I used the time.time() function to measure the time taken to process
the update step.
And If you may compare the odd steps of both logs i.e the numbers in
the lines having "seconds taken to update frame" appearing at the odd
(3rd ,5th ,7th.....entries) and similarily compare the even steps
you may find the average time taken on XO-1.5 to run the update
function was nearly 50% faster.
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Martin Dengler
<martin at martindengler.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:15:01PM +0530, Anurag Chowdhury wrote:
> > I carried out the same benchmark test, which I earlier conducted on an
> > XO-1.5 , on a X0-1 .
> Please tell us what the test is/was. How many times did you run it?
> How did you make sure nothing else interfered with the system cpu and
> memory while you were running it?
> > And I have attached the log files obtained in both the cases. [...]
> > the consecutive times taken for the rendering of the frames on the
> > XO-1 were much larger as compared to that on a XO-1.5.
> I compared the means and standard deviations for the numbers in the
> lines having "seconds taken to update frame" and I don't understand
> how you came to that "very much larger" conclusion:
> $ (~/src/stddev.py < ~/tmp/xo15 ; ~/src/stddev.py < ~/tmp/xo10) | \
> for 'seconds taken to update frame':
> XO 1.0 mean was 0.021002, XO 1.5 mean was 0.014994
> ...change in speed was -28.605292%
> You can find the data from your logs (I had to remove some numbers
> that were split across the stderr output that was mixed in with your
> logging) and the scripts mentioned at:
> Please, can you do more than wave your hands to help us understand the
> effect of what you've done? You want to affect a key part of the
> system for a lot of people. It's a bit frustrating to hear talk of
> "very much larger" speed without actually knowing how and what you're
> > Regards,
> > --Anurag
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7032 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Sugar-devel