Not immediately, no. I can't even determine right now whether we can do anything about this. You're seeing crazy CPU loads that we're definitely not seeing, and most of this has to do with the browser itself. We're loading the files asynchronously, but it appears that for whatever reason your browser is blocking until it's all loaded (if I'm understanding right). I'm wondering if there's something with the configuration in your browsers where you work that is causing some of this.
You say this is happening on several different browsers? In the case of Firefox, what extensions are loaded? We definitely would like to fix this. But we just don't know enough about what the problem is right now to determine if it's in our control. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.review-board.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 9:54 AM, ciaomary <ciaom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Can anything be done to fix the pegged CPU issue I've reported in my > prior email? > > On Mar 17, 9:38 am, ciaomary <ciaom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The downloadable diff for the review is 1.6MB. > > > > The review has 138 different files (7 pages). > > > > Page 1 loads in ~1 minute in FireFox. The twenty files are on average > > 38 K. (max=118K, min=2K). Here all files have edit changes (no deleted > > files.) > > > > Page 3 loads in ~3 minutes in FireFox. The twenty files are on average > > 25K . No major deviations from the average. Here 12 of the files have > > been deleted rather than just edited. > > > > There are hundreds of review comments on this review across many users > > and files. > > > > During page load, the CPU is pegged and the browser is unresponsive > > for a good 2-3 minutes. This is the cause every time, very > > reproducable. If you are patient the page finally loads and the system > > CPU returns to normal. > > > > FireBug shows an HTTPS GET request for each of the twenty files during > > the slow down/cpu pegging. Each HTTPS GETS are taking longer on page > > 3, with some taking up to 2.5 seconds (others < 50ms). Since the is > > cpu is pegged the browser processing seems to be the cause of the > > delay however. > > > > On Mar 16, 6:31 pm, Christian Hammond <chip...@chipx86.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > So it's really going to depend on the sizes of the individual files > > > themselves. If a file is by itself large enough to cause a couple meg > diff > > > to be generated, there's nothing we can do really do, since that boils > down > > > to too large a file to show in the browser. > > > > > In your page 3 example, how big are the files and the diffs in > particular? > > > > > The page itself loads quick enough, right? It's just the diff > fragments? > > > Which ones are you finding takes a long time and how big are those > changes? > > > > > Christian > > > > > -- > > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com > > > Review Board -http://www.review-board.org > > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com > > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 5:32 PM, mary <ciaom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On really large diffs, performance is very slow and can crash the > > > > browser. > > > > > > We've picked up the recent 3/13/09 nightly which has helped > enormously > > > > (A BIG THANKS!) but that said, we're still finding pages that take 3+ > > > > minutes to load. > > > > > > For example.... we have one review in particular that has File > Changes > > > > spread over 6 ReviewBoard pages. Page 3 takes on average 3+ minutes > to > > > > load. It also readily crashes my browser - pegging my CPU and I have > > > > to kill the session. (URL=https://reviewboard/r/2808/diff/?page=3). > > > > This is in FireFox 3.0.7. Under IE the page doesn't load without > > > > running into script errors. Unfortunately, these large ReviewBoard > > > > diffs are a typical use case at our company (typically when large > > > > merges are done) and breaking things across more than 10 reviews jsut > > > > isn't plausible. I should mention that not only are the diff > fragments > > > > themselves large for these use cases but the number of reviewers and > > > > comments gets to be very large too. We're maxing out what ReviewBoard > > > > can handle on all fronts. > > > > > > Can further investigation be done into these performance issues for > > > > us? I will supply further information as I collect it. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mary- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "reviewboard" group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
