[Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH v5 sugar] Pulsing icon delayed by 5 seconds or so SL#2080

[Anurag Chowdhury]

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Martin Dengler
<martin at martindengler.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry to harp on this, but I hope you can see it actually takes
> quite some effort to communicate this stuff well...
>
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:27:18PM +0530, Anurag Chowdhury wrote:
>> I have attached the pulsingicon.py file
>
> Thanks - very useful to understand what you're timing.
>
>> in which I placed the benchmark script
>
> which benchmark script?!  Another file you should include.
>
No , Its just my lingo . I meant no other file and benchmark script
only meant the time.time() function used to get time taken to update
frame.
>  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.
>
> There is a better way: use cProfile and gprof2dot.py.  You will get
> graphs (and of course the raw data) like this:
>
Thanks and I appreciate the pointers., but I did it this way as I
wanted it simple and to the point. :)
> http://www.martindengler.com/tmp/sl.o-2080/pulsingicon.py-stats-graph.png
>
> ...and then you could show us before and after your change on the XO
> 1.0 and XO 1.5.  Normally the relative time is most interesting, but
> since we are also interested in the absolute running time I patched
> gprof2dot.py to show that, and you can see the total time (in seconds)
> consumed by each graph node and its subtree as the second-to-last
> number shown in the node.
>
> You can find the pulsingicon.py changes and the instructions I used to
> make that in:
> http://www.martindengler.com/tmp/sl.o-2080/README.txt
>
>> 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
>> steps
>> (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.
>
> Odd steps?  Even steps?  Sounds scary.  Why?
>
Sorry for the confusion. What  I meant to say by frames renders at odd
steps was 1st frame, 3rd frame , 5th frame.........so on, similarily
for even frames.
> Martin
>