Summary: this Clock activity consumes significantly less CPU on XO-4 and XO-1 when implemented in Javascript.
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 08:42:18PM -0300, Manuel Qui?ones wrote: > 2013/4/30 James Cameron <qu...@laptop.org>: > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 08:58:50AM -0300, Manuel Qui?ones wrote: > >> Should work on other browsers now: > >> > >> http://manuq.github.io/clockjs/ > > > > Agreed, works well, reasonably low CPU utilisation. Thanks. > > Excellent. Thanks for checking the CPU consumption. Here's a more detailed check. Method is to run only the activity under test, and use the serial port to run the Linux top command configured for a 30 second sample time. -- On XO-4 using 13.1.0: - using Javascript, the Browse-149 process consumes 7.5% CPU, and the X process 3.2% CPU. Total of 10.7% CPU. - not using Javascript, the Clock-12 process consumes 2.7% CPU, and the X process 13.2% CPU. Total of 15.9% CPU. (Were there any changes to the algorithm? e.g. is the Sugar activity drawing more frequently than the Javascript activity?) -- On XO-1 using 13.2.0, build 32004o0, - using Javascript, the Browse-149.2 process consumes 9.8%, the X process 7.4%, a total of 17.2%, - not using Javascript, the Clock-12 process consumes 10.4% and X process consumes 18.4%, a total of 30.8%. -- On XO-1 using 11.3.0, build 883, - using Javascript, the Browse 129.1 does not render the script, - not using Javascript, the Clock-6 consumes 7.0%, and X consumed 9.0%, a total of 16%. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel