When I'm running my test, it's not from a clean directory. Everything is already built. Thus, for the most part, the build doesn't really do anything. You basically end up configuring a bunch of plugins that see that they don't have to do anything. Thus, it's perfect for timing how much time MAVEN is doing things, and not javac or resources or checkstyle or anything.
That's the number I care about. If an automated build from clean source takes an extra 20%, I don't really care. However, if normal developer builds that aren't building from completely clean trees take 800% longer, that's a HUGE problem. How long would mvn -Prelease,reports install site -Dmaven.test.skip.exec=true if run twice? Dan On Tuesday 19 August 2008 11:42:53 am John Casey wrote: > I'm trying to run the CXF build on Hudson right now with a RC10 > snapshot, so hopefully I can find out why your times are so far off in > CXF... > > I adjusted a few things last night to try to streamline the > concretization for aggregators and users of reactor projects. When I was > done, the full build for maven's core (mvn -Prelease,reports clean > install site) only took 2 minutes longer than the 13-minute 2.0.9 build... > > I'm wondering what circumstances are present in the CXF build that throw > that one so wide of where 2.0.9 lands. > > -john > > Daniel Kulp wrote: > > Just another quick note... > > > > Our -Pfastinstall profile (to build/install as fast as possible) > > > > 2.0.9: > > [INFO] Total time: 32 seconds > > [INFO] Finished at: Mon Aug 18 21:51:07 EDT 2008 > > [INFO] Final Memory: 53M/94M > > > > > > 2.0.10-RC9: > > [INFO] Total time: 4 minutes 39 seconds > > [INFO] Finished at: Mon Aug 18 21:56:04 EDT 2008 > > [INFO] Final Memory: 77M/145M > > > > > > I was just going to mention the memory thing as well. However, my > > MAVEN_OPTS are set at: > > MAVEN_OPTS=-XX:MaxPermSize=192m -Xmx512M > > so it definitely had plenty of memory to play with. > > > > This is cxf trunk: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cxf/trunk/ > > mvn -Pfastinstall > > > > > > Dan > > > > On Monday 18 August 2008 9:05:35 pm Daniel Kulp wrote: > >> John, > >> > >> The performance issue is back: > >> > >> For CXF/tunk: > >> mvn install -Pdeploy,everything,nochecks > >> > >> 2.0.9: > >> Total time: 8 minutes 35 seconds > >> > >> 2.0.10-RC9: > >> Total time: 19 minutes > >> > >> > >> Dan > >> > >> On Monday 18 August 2008 2:48:36 pm John Casey wrote: > >>> Hi everyone, > >>> > >>> As you're probably aware, we've been working for some time to stabilize > >>> Maven for the 2.0.10 release. After quite a bit of testing in the > >>> development community - and 8 release candidates - it looks like we > >>> finally have a candidate that is free of regressions and stable. You > >>> can download it here: > >>> > >>> http://people.apache.org/~jdcasey/apache-maven/2.0.10-RC9/org/apache/ma > >>>ve n/ apache-maven/2.0.10-RC9 > >>> > >>> While it does seem that all of our builds are happy with the new > >>> release candidate, we'd like to get your feedback on it before we > >>> finalize things. This will help us respond to any regressions or > >>> critical issues we may have missed BEFORE we do the release, instead of > >>> having to put up with major flaws for another release cycle. > >>> > >>> Please, if you have the time, take 2.0.10-RC9 for a spin and tell us > >>> what you think! > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> > >>> -john > >>> > >>> P.S. To see the list of issues that were closed for this release (so > >>> far), check out: > >>> > >>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500&styleN > >>>am e= Html&version=14112 -- Daniel Kulp [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
