OODT-910 On 30 Oct 2015 14:30, "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" < chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> I’m down to help investigate this. Let’s create some JIRAs :) > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. > Chief Architect > Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398) > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA > Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527 > Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov > WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi> > Reply-To: "dev@oodt.apache.org" <dev@oodt.apache.org> > Date: Friday, October 30, 2015 at 4:57 AM > To: "dev@oodt.apache.org" <dev@oodt.apache.org> > Subject: Re: Size of psc-opsui > > >Right, so in here: > > > >https://github.com/apache/oodt/blob/master/webapp/components/pom.xml > > > >You just have plain calls to the various OODT components that the webapps > >require to function. > > > >So, In the wmonitor I seen an exclusion on cas-filemgr which is the sort > >of > >thing I was expecting. > > > >I don't see how, for example, in the file manager you can scope a > >dependency, because surely when you build the core component for > >deployment > >in Radix or something you want the compile time dependencies in the > >filemgr > >lib directory, which means you can't scope it out AFAIK. > > > >In which case, you need to figure out which dependencies the webapps will > >never use, and exclude them. > > > >That said, your file manager webapp uses an API to communicate with the > >file manager server from what I understand. So if the filemanager was down > >opsui would still function, just not communicate with the FM. If that is > >the case, is there a requirement to bundle the file manager at all, or > >just > >create a light layer that allows for bidirectional communication with the > >file manager itself? > > > >Because its Wicket and JSP's there is a requirement there for OpsUI to use > >the jar, but you could swap it out for REST/JSON and have 0 dependency on > >the file manager if you are pushing all operations to it and not doing > >anything inside OpsUI.... If you can follow any of that rambling. > > > > > >Tom > > > >On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < > >lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> What your saying about te Mars bars is true. > >> On the remainder... > >> 220 days is something that everyone on this list should take notice of. > >> This is serious reductions in what is commonly acknowledged throughout > >>our > >> industry as technical debt. > >> @Tom, > >> Unpredictable builds in XMLRPC are OK... Because there are around 20 or > >>so > >> people the see the builds when they happen. We can fix them reasonable > >> quickly or else realize that there is an environment error. > >> > >> On the other hand, what are we doing about these friggin war's? > >> > >> I did a bit of investigation. However I did not track it to parent Pom. > >>I > >> don't think we have any scope set for many native dependencies e.g. OODT > >> deps inheriting from another OODT module. I think scope would help us > >> reduce the size of these beasts/ > >> > >> On Friday, October 30, 2015, Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi> > wrote: > >> > >> > On a slightly different note, seen Sonar, I've used every trick in the > >> > book(Idea Analysis and fixing etc) and worked my nads off trying to > >>get > >> the > >> > Tech Debt number down, and after whats probably 5 full days of work on > >> it, > >> > I've got rid of...... 220 days. Grim. > >> > > >> > Also because xmlrpc isn't mocked sometimes when the builds run on the > >> same > >> > box, you get the tests failing because of the port conflicts which > >> doesn't > >> > help. > >> > > >> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi > >> > <javascript:;>> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > I was thinking more a Haggis followed by 2 battered mars bars... but > >> > > either way, not sure scope is particularly useful if you look at the > >> poms > >> > > they are dragged in as transient dependencies by the various OODT > >> > modules, > >> > > it might be more of a big fat, <exclude> block for the stuff that > >>wont > >> > get > >> > > used by the webapps. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < > >> > > lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> You bet they are heavy... > >> > >> Heavy as a sumo wrestler after eating five fish suppers and tanning > >> six > >> > >> bottles of fine french wine. Then washing it down with 2 mars bars > >> and a > >> > >> can of diet coca cola. > >> > >> <scope> is our friend. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Tom Barber > >><tom.bar...@meteorite.bi > >> > <javascript:;>> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > Looking at some of the dependencies in the fmbrowser for > >>example, do > >> > you > >> > >> > need the full aws java sdk? (12mb), poi xml schemas(5.4mb), > >>netcdf > >> is > >> > >> 11mb > >> > >> > although I assume that is required. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Thats 28mb of dependencies without even trying, they are pretty > >> heavy > >> > >> > weight. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Tom > >> > >> > > >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) < > >> > >> > chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Ack if we can reduce that would be stellar > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > Sent from my iPhone > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:12 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < > >> > >> > > lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > No way... so it cas-product-0.11-20151028.223453-48.war > >> > >> > > > 60777 KB > >> > >> > > > I just cleared my ~/.m2 cache and by God these artifacts make > >> Moby > >> > >> > Dick's > >> > >> > > > forehead look like the tails side of a one pence piece.. > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < > >> > >> > > > lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > >> OK so it turns out that > >> pcs-services-0.11-20151028.223756-49.war > >> > is > >> > >> > > around > >> > >> > > >> the same size > >> > >> > > >> 62186 KB > >> > >> > > >> These are HUGE for web application containers. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < > >> > >> > > >> lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >>> Hi Folks, > >> > >> > > >>> I am slightly concerned that the pcs-opsui .war artifact > >>is as > >> > >> large > >> > >> > as > >> > >> > > >>> Aundrey The Giants left arse cheek... 67831KB's to be > >>precise. > >> > >> > > >>> I wonder if there is something we can do about this. None > >>of > >> the > >> > >> OODT > >> > >> > > >>> dependencies have any <scope> so I wonder if there is > >>actual > >> > >> scope to > >> > >> > > >>> reduce the soze of the artifact. > >> > >> > > >>> Lewis > >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> -- > >> > >> > > >>> *Lewis* > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> -- > >> > >> > > >> *Lewis* > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > -- > >> > >> > > > *Lewis* > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> *Lewis* > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> -- > >> *Lewis* > >> > >
