Hi Michael,
slightly off topic, but speaking of performance improvements: Didn't
these numbers about the expense of the reference counters on older Intel
processors (pre Hyperthreading, say Pentium III) come initially form you?
I changed the implementation of the reference counters in m191 so on
older processors should we see 5-6 percent improvements on the more
notorious docs while hopefully not damaging the performance for current
CPU's.
Heiner
Leibowitz, Michael wrote:
It's very easy to measure how long it takes to open a file. You can use
the UNO API and gettimeofday. If just want something quick and dirty,
you can just use RTL_LOGFILE.
However, figuring out what is a typical document is not. For our
performance profiling, we have a collection of about 100 documents
culled from inside of Intel. This is an imperfect sample, and we've
never felt comfortable with a particular set of documents as being
representative.
BTW, I'd also like to plug i#53055 at this time for speeding .doc
imports (it even saves memory)
--
Michael Leibowitz
Software Engineer, Channel Platform Solutions Group
Intel Corporation
michael.leibowitz at intel.com
+1 503 264 7621
-----Original Message-----
From: Utomo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:07 PM
To: dev@openoffice.org
Subject: RE: [dev] Bounty for performance improvements
Thanks for the suggestions.
My original idea was.
To make Ooo faster opening the Microsoft Office files. (but without
adding
memory usage by OOo)
Especially for user with old computer, such as PIII with around 128
memory
(which now mostly suffer from the huge memory usage by Ooo, and they
feel
very long time opening the Microsoft office files). I hear many PIII
user
complain about this, and this make them stop using Ooo. And I think it
need
to be improved, so it can make them happy and use Ooo.
(I will provide some test file when the bounty start.)
Example:
Original Ooo without patch open the file in 60 second
Ooo with patch open the file in 30 second
In My opinion this is a 50% Improvements.
But sometimes it is not easy to measure how long opening a files is.
( I think judges will help decide it)
What do you think ?
Best Regards,
Utomo
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 10:35 AM
To: dev@openoffice.org
Subject: Re: [dev] Bounty for performance improvements
Utomo wrote:
I am waiting and open for suggestions.
Is there somebody can help me to determine how is the performance
improvements measured ?
Utomo
I have a few comments:
Performance should be quantified and explained by the submitter. In
other words, the submitter should indicate how to test and demonstrate
a
speed improvement.
Memory and runtime both sounds like improvements to me.
Broader impact should carry more weight. For example, a 100%
improvement
in sort speed is probably not as important as a 10% improvement in
screen redraw time because the screen is almost always updated. By the
same token, a 10% improvement in screen redraw may also beat a 20%
improvement in macro run-time.
I would probably use imprecise statements as those, and then after some
prioritizing, leave the final decision to public voting if it is not
obvious as to the final winner, or simply decide up front, that public
voting will be done.
--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
My Book: http://www.hentzenwerke.com/catalog/oome.htm
Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
See Also: http://documentation.openoffice.org/HOW_TO/index.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Jens-Heiner Rechtien
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
