Hi Li, Steve, I'm afraid I'm without an OpenSolaris box at the moment :). Give it some time and that might change. Instead I have modified the IDL generation tool to place some logging calls in all of the stub functions, which seems to work ok. Not too worried about overhead, just want to find out what most of the activity on the AT-SPI interface consists of. Are the test cases checked into the GOK SVN tree?
Steve: Yes I think the fact that it ends up calling at-spi does make it worth testing. Its more the type of calls made that I want to look at, rather than the performance of cspi itself. In all the ORBit performance tests I have done so far, the client side of the interface was using the Python bindings. Thanks Mark On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 10:18 +0000, Steve Lee wrote: > I'm wondering how useful the results for cspi are seeing that it has > been declared obsolete AFAIK? Does the fact that it ends up calling > at-spi outweigh any possible differences in the way it works? > > Steve Lee > > On 23/11/2007, Li Yuan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > > > We have about 35 gok test cases. And I can write a D-trace script to > > count function calls in cspi or at-spi-registryd. But you need to have > > an OpenSolaris box to run D-trace script. :-) > > > > Regards, > > Li > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 16:58 +0000, Mark Doffman wrote: > > > I intend to continue with some more performance testing, for the > > > moment > > > I would like to profile the use of the AT-SPI interface made by GOK. > > > Does anyone know of some GOK tests that will give a good idea of the > > > calls made during normal use? > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
