http://dev.laptop.org/~tomeu/datastore*.kgrind
and https://dev.laptop.org/attachment/ticket/3979/datastore5.kgrind Hard to say what we profiled exactly now though :) Marco On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:12 AM, Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> First step: data to see if there is a problem. >>> >>> If no problem; stop. >>> >>> If problem; fix... >>> >>> ;-). >>> >>> DBUS, btw, does not have to be inefficient; the wire protocol is sane >>> (distinguishing it from Corba, for example). What Python does on the >>> way to the wire is a different question. >> >> Tomeu collected data about this a while ago, perhaps he still have the >> profiles. > > Uff, no idea where that could be. But data marshalling wasn't in the > top of the list of performance issues. > > In the only case I think it could be causing problems is when the > preview (max 60KB) is sent across the wire. But in the cases where > that method is used, I don't know of any performance problem. > > My suggestion: > > 1. Use the software as an actual user would do. > 2. Identify areas where slow performance causes an usability problem. > 3. Profile at the system level (sysprof or oprofile) and identify > which chunk of code is taking most cpu. > 4. If it's python or python-called code, use lsprofcalltree to analyze > the performance behavior: > http://codespeak.net/pypy/dist/pypy/tool/lsprofcalltree.py > 5. Fix it. > > Regards, > > Tomeu > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel