Blake Ross wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, has it been ascertained that Pierre's new fix for
> 43457 <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43457> has little
> noticeable performance impact?
>
I got the Mac tests for today, and they show insignificant change from the
Mac verification build from yesterday. I didn't get results for linux and
win32 so I will be running those tests shortly.
John
>
> (Also, I think it's time to cut down the cc list here...)
>
>
>
> --Blake
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Marc Attinasi <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> *To:* Chris Waterson <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> *Cc:* Chris Hofmann <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; John Morrison
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; George Drapeau
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 07, 2001 9:09 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: Performance Regression needs love-> was Re: Load-time
> test results (01/26/2001)
>
>
>
> I have some information now. First, I apologize for taking so long- I
> had the misfortune of getting sick during this analysis.
>
> So comparing builds from 1/18 and 2/2 I can see approximately a 15%
> slowdown in Frame Creation time, going from 0.086 sec. to 0.102 sec.
> Also, Style Resolution slowed from approximately 0.223 sec. to 0.248
> sec, or about 9%.
>
> Total layout time went from .559 sec to 0.592, or about a 6% slowdown.
>
> This does not seem to account for the total slowdown we are seeing -
> clearly there is something else going on. In fact, the general noise
> factor in the Gecko Performance Tests are about 5%, so the change I am
> seeing could be noise, although I believe that there is a slight
> performance degradation worth looking into in frame creation and
> probably style resolution.
>
> These results are all from Viewer. It could be that the problem is
> actually in Mozilla itself, and Pierre has produced some interesting
> data on the impact of skins on performance[1].
>
>
> - marc
>
> 1. news://news.mozilla.org/3A814068.A8E21741%40netscape.com
>
> Chris Waterson wrote:
>
> > We have still made zero progress on this:. A week has gone by,
> and page
> > load is still down by 13%. Here are the people that are on the hook
> > during the time that the slowdown occurred. If I made a quick look
> > through the deltas
> >
> >
> >
> http://bonsai.mozilla.org/showcheckins.cgi?&treeid=SeaMonkey&batchid=453
>
><http://bonsai.mozilla.org/showcheckins.cgi?&treeid=SeaMonkey&batchid=453>
> >
> > If had to guess, I'd say that darin and ftang should be reviewing
> their
> > changes...
> >
> > chris
> >
> > Chris Hofmann wrote:
> >
> >>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> The following people are on "the hook", since they have made
> checkins
> >> to the tree since it last opened:
> >>
> >> Who What
> >> Peter.VanderBeken%pandora.be2 changes
> >> av%netscape.com 1 change
> >> axel%pike.org 7 changes
> >> beard%netscape.com 1 change (1 while tree closed!)
> >> ben%netscape.com 1 change
> >> bienvenu%netscape.com 2 changes
> >> blakeross%telocity.com 10 changes
> >> brade%netscape.com 1 change
> >> ccarlen%netscape.com 14 changes
> >> cls%seawood.org 1 change
> >> darin%netscape.com 34 changes (2 while tree closed!)
> >> dbaron%fas.harvard.edu 5 changes (4 while tree closed!)
> >> dmose%mozilla.org 1 change
> >> dr%netscape.com 1 change
> >> jj%netscape.com 1 change (1 while tree closed!)
> >> kin%netscape.com 19 changes
> >> mcafee%netscape.com 8 changes (8 while tree closed!)
> >> mkaply%us.ibm.com 4 changes (2 while tree closed!)
> >> mscott%netscape.com 2 changes
> >> neeti%netscape.com 1 change
> >> nhotta%netscape.com 1 change (1 while tree closed!)
> >> racham%netscape.com 15 changes
> >> radha%netscape.com 1 change
> >> sspitzer%netscape.com 1 change
> >> timeless%mac.com 2 changes
> >> yokoyama%netscape.com 1 change
> >> 137 checkins.
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Performance History and Trending Table
>
>
> Wednesday 2/7/2001 17:40:08
>
>
> *Pull-ID* *Build-ID* *Parsing* *Content Creation* *Frame Creation*
> *Style Resolution* *Reflow* *Total Layout* *Total Time*
> Sec %
>
> Sec %
>
> Sec %
>
> Sec %
>
> Sec %
>
> Sec %
>
> Sec
>
> Jan18-a
> 0.114 19.294
>
>
> 98.37 %
> 0.106 19.353
>
>
> 95.60 %
> 0.088 16.223
>
>
> 85.04 %
> 0.222 40.174
>
>
> 89.11 %
> 0.031 4.956
>
>
> 89.68 %
> 0.560 48.221
>
>
> 93.87 %
> 1.160
>
>
> 95.78 %
> Jan18-b
> 0.104 18.377
>
>
> 89.51 %
> 0.111 19.854
>
>
> 100.00 %
> 0.084 15.204
>
>
> 81.17 %
> 0.224 40.784
>
>
> 90.08 %
> 0.034 5.781
>
>
> 100.00 %
> 0.557 48.071
>
>
> 93.29 %
> 1.162
>
>
> 95.91 %
> Feb02-a
> 0.116 18.733
>
>
> 100.00 %
> 0.104 18.249
>
>
> 94.38 %
> 0.099 17.485
>
>
> 95.25 %
> 0.249 41.079
>
>
> 100.00 %
> 0.029 4.454
>
>
> 84.92 %
> 0.597 49.414
>
>
> 100.00 %
> 1.211
>
>
> 100.00 %
> Feb02-b
> 0.109 18.295
>
>
> 93.94 %
> 0.108 18.702
>
>
> 97.31 %
> 0.104 18.017
>
>
> 100.00 %
> 0.236 40.202
>
>
> 94.78 %
> 0.031 4.784
>
>
> 89.68 %
> 0.586 49.690
>
>
> 98.28 %
> 1.188
>
>
> 98.03 %
>
