Guys? Any comments on what has been said here?

On Wednesday, 17 October 2012 14:05:18 UTC-5, Chris wrote:
>
> A bug that results in significant increase in memory and CPU usage is 
> somewhat concerning, especially with the sunset of the v201109 API fast 
> approaching. A response from the AdWords API team on this would be much 
> appreciated.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Wednesday, 17 October 2012 13:10:31 UTC-5, j.e.frank wrote:
>>
>> Yes.  All I care about is whether the account had any activity (i.e. 
>> impressions) over a given date range, so an empty report means that it's 
>> not active, for my purposes.  I don't care if the account is "active" in 
>> the sense of being available to run.
>>
>> On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:09:30 PM UTC-4, Oliver wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for sharing such a great optimization tip.
>>>
>>> Aside from the performance issue, I am curious to know how your're 
>>> handling the account reports when there are no impressions.  There is a 
>>> known bug with the Account Performance Report whereby it comes back 
>>> completely empty if there is no impression data.  Are you parsing an empty 
>>> report as non-active account?
>>>
>>> Oliver
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:13:16 PM UTC+1, j.e.frank wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I noticed this post that was also related to report serialization and 
>>>> jaxb:
>>>>
>>>> https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/community/?place=msg%2Fadwords-api%2F2h_hhyThed0%2FN94XKOfR2GoJ
>>>>
>>>> I made my own version of the serializer for a ReportDefinition object, 
>>>> that creates a single JaxBContext object and reuses it instead of making a 
>>>> new one each time.  According to some web searching that I did, the 
>>>> JaxBContext is threadsafe so this should be fine, and in fact the 
>>>> recommended approach is to use just one JaxBContext.  This change made a 
>>>> significant reduction in my CPU utilization, in addition to the permgen 
>>>> memory issues that Eli mentions in the post above.
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 4:18:31 PM UTC-4, j.e.frank wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm upgrading from v201109 to v201209 in java.  I have a method which 
>>>>> figures out all of our "active" accounts over a given time frame, by 
>>>>> running a simple report for each account and seeing if there are any 
>>>>> impressions.  I tested it out and it works fine but my CPU is pretty much 
>>>>> pinned at 100% while that method is running.  I went back to the earlier 
>>>>> version and it doesn't get much above 20%.
>>>>>
>>>>> At first I thought it was a difference from the "old" java library to 
>>>>> the "new", so I also tried it with v201209 in the "old" library and had 
>>>>> the 
>>>>> same issue.  I haven't done profiling yet to figure out what the exact 
>>>>> difference is, so I was wondering if anyone else has experienced a 
>>>>> similar 
>>>>> issue.  My first theory is that it has something to do with 
>>>>> serializing/deserializing, since I know that has changed significantly 
>>>>> with 
>>>>> jaxb.
>>>>>
>>>>

-- 
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
Also find us on our blog and discussion group:
http://adwordsapi.blogspot.com
http://groups.google.com/group/adwords-api
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "AdWords API Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/adwords-api?hl=en

Reply via email to