On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Dolph Mathews <dolph.math...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Boris Pavlovic <bo...@pavlovic.me> wrote: > >> Jay, >> >> >> Not far, IMHO. 100ms difference in startup time isn't something we should >>> spend much time optimizing. There's bigger fish to fry. >> >> >> I agree that priority of this task shouldn't be critical or even high, >> and that there are other places that can be improved in OpenStack. >> >> In other hand this one is as well big source of UX issues that we have in >> OpenStack.. >> >> For example: >> >> 1) You would like to run some command X times where X is pretty big >> (admins likes to do this via bash loops). If you can execute all of them >> for 1 and not 10 minutes you will get happier end user. >> > > +1 I'm fully in support of this effort. Shaving 100ms off the startup time > of a frequently used library means that you'll save that 100ms over and > over, adding up to a huge win. > > Another data point on how slow our libraries/CLIs can be: $ time openstack -h <snip> real 0m2.491s user 0m2.378s sys 0m0.111s > >> 2) Bash completion - should be online. >> For example, it takes about 600-700ms to run Rally, so we need to have >> hardcoded bash completion scripts, because otherwise it is too slow and not >> consumable. >> >> There are other use cases where starting speed is crucial but IMHO >> authors of libs should help to make projects faster and users happier, >> especially when it is quite simple task. >> >> >> >>> p.s. Boris, please don't hate me :) >> >> >> I will ;) >> >> >> Best regards, >> Boris Pavlovic >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 04/06/2015 07:02 AM, Brant Knudson wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Boris Pavlovic <bo...@pavlovic.me >>>> <mailto:bo...@pavlovic.me>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Brant, >>>> >>>> I run profimp with and without patch >>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/164066/: >>>> And it really works well: >>>> >>>> before 170ms: >>>> http://boris-42.github.io/keystone/before.html >>>> >>>> after 76ms: >>>> http://boris-42.github.io/keystone/after.html >>>> >>>> Looks like now the issue is that keystoneclient imports pbr.version so >>>> that it can get pbr to generate the __version__ value. Maybe pbr could >>>> be more efficient about the work it does on import, or we could figure >>>> out a different / lazy way to generate the version string. >>>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/python-keystoneclient/tree/ >>>> keystoneclient/__init__.py#n35 >>>> >>>> How far do we need to go with this? >>>> >>> >>> Not far, IMHO. 100ms difference in startup time isn't something we >>> should spend much time optimizing. There's bigger fish to fry. >>> >>> Best, >>> -jay >>> >>> p.s. Boris, please don't hate me :) >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> ______________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject: >>> unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev