And just to be clear, by testing I meant "consideration for inclusion" + testing.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Erik Froese <erik.fro...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm happy to let the Java PP testing slide to 1.5.0 > > There are some recent improvements in the ruby PP that I need to implement. > * sakaidocs - (easy, call out to wkhtmltopdf) > * image previews in the same format as the original > > Erik > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Kent Fitzgerald <kentf...@umich.edu> wrote: >> Several questions/comments. >> There has already been 1.4.1. release proposed for immediately following >> 1.4.0 that would be isolated to code reformatting . Which would take >> precedence? >> >> We should definitely do a bug bash. One of the dangers of doing a bug bash >> focused on the preview processor is that we'll likely have people uploading >> hundreds of files each. Subjectively, this could give the impression of >> decreased performance just because we're hitting it much harder. >> >> More importantly, in addition to the bug bash, we need to do controlled >> tests on processing time on different data types. I'd like to break it down >> by file types and have truly controlled tests, in addition to different file >> types we'll need files of varying sizes to compare performance not just on >> quantity but on complexity. This needs to be compared to the performance of >> the current implementation. >> >> I think we all agree that this is an important feature that we shouldn't try >> to rush out the door. >> >> I have to read back through the thread, but is there set-up documentation? >> Currently we have a section on the OAE Configuration and Deployment page [1] >> for the preview processor. It's contains multiple supporting external links >> that have proven confusing for many people trying to get preview processor >> running locally. We'll need to make sure we have adequate documentation. >> >> As a side note, I will be out of the office starting this Friday through >> next week. >> >> >> [1] >> https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/OAE+Configuration+and+Deployment >> >> >> >> -- >> Kent Fitzgerald >> >> On Tuesday, July 24, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Nicolaas Matthijs wrote: >> >> Looks like this has been hanging around on list for a while now, and we >> should probably try to move it forwards. >> >> The maintainability criterion can only be determined by a code review, which >> is standard practice. However, as this is proving to be such a critical >> feature in production, I'd suggest that we do a separate bugbash to evaluate >> its performance, ease of setup (running from a separate machine) and most >> importantly functional equivalence. >> >> When doing this, Kent can give his assessment of the ease of setup and the >> bugbashers can determine functional equivalence. We should also try to have >> it re-process the dummy content we usually bugbash with. >> >> If this all sounds good, I'd like to go ahead with this as soon as possible >> and run a bugbash straight after the 1.4.0 release with all of this set up. >> If the implementation survives the bugbash, it can be reviewed and merged. >> >> Does that sound reasonable? >> >> Thanks, >> Nicolaas >> >> >> >> On 23 Jul 2012, at 07:42, Carl Hall wrote: >> >> Lance, I think the work is already split the way you suggest given what I >> know about what Erik has done (rewrite in Java) and what's left (add JMS). >> Adding message queue capabilities should not hold back reviewing the >> proposed changes. >> >> I would say that it needs to meet these opening criteria for my general >> acceptance: >> >> * Be functionally equal with the current solution >> * A combination of performance and maintainability >> * Perform can be no worse overall. There might be different hotspots in >> the java version than the current ruby solution but there shouldn't be >> anything exponentially worse. Overall, the java version has to perform at >> least as good and hopefully better. Memory usage, overall processing time, >> resource usage (iops, disc reads, caching) should all be considered. >> * Be more maintainable than the Ruby solution. The current code has had >> very little cleaning and is not very readable. This includes using >> externally available libraries where possible. We shouldn't be maintaining >> plumbing not inherent to our domain. >> * Easier to setup. Though our current setup for the ruby PP is known to be >> problematic, we at least are accustomed to it. The proposed solution has got >> to be more straightforward and less fragile. >> >> The numbers I've seen from some preliminary testing showed the Java impl to >> take exponentially *less* time to process pdfs and was faster than the ruby >> PP in every test. It's an OSGi bundle and written in Java like the rest of >> our project which makes it easier to setup and maintain as we write far more >> java code than ruby. I believe there's also already a setup available to run >> the java PP as a standalone server. >> The Java version introduces a topia term extractor bundle which is a port >> from the Python version. This is a point of maintenance to consider but the >> python code has changed in years. It's a common impl for other languages to >> port but there wasn't a java version around. I would like to see this code >> find a permanent home in a relative OSS project. At the very least it should >> be maintained apart from OAE core to make it available to a broader >> audience. >> >> +1 to getting this code wrapped up and reviewed. >> >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Christian Vuerings >> <vueringschrist...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I'm not sure whether this is already part of the criteria list or not, but >> what about CPU/Memory usage? >> Is there a way we can measure that and compare it to the current ruby based >> PP? >> When I currently run the ruby PP locally, it's usually one of the processes >> that uses the most resources. >> >> One other thing I'm curious about is how well it will compress/handle the >> different file formats (png/jpg/gif/psd) >> >> These are just 2 things that I'm interested in since they (can) have an >> impact on the overall performance. >> >> >> - Christian >> >> On Jul 18, 2012, at 12:41 PM, Lance Speelmon wrote: >> >> Does anyone have an opinion about adopting the new java based PP? >> Specifically can you articulate acceptance criteria for such an adoption? >> e.g. >> >> Must support same preview behaviors as existing ruby-based PP. >> Must pass QA with all blocker and critical items resolved. >> Must start automatically OOTB to support the tire-kicking, web-start uses. >> Must leverage as much 3rd party code as possible to minimize ownership >> costs. >> Must pass code review. >> Unit test code coverage. >> Basic config and deployment documentation. >> >> >> What is missing? Anything? Thanks, L >> >> >> >> On Jul 17, 2012, at 2:58 PM, Lance Speelmon <la...@rsmart.com> wrote: >> >> Is there any way to break this work down into chunks? e.g. >> >> 1. Adopt java PP as default PP moving forward. What are the acceptance >> criteria? >> 2. Enhance new java PP with message queue abilities. >> >> WDYT? Thanks, L >> >> On Jul 17, 2012, at 8:34 AM, Carl Hall <c...@hallwaytech.com> wrote: >> >> Each app server could run it's own queues but that wouldn't support building >> a farm of PP processors unless we also teach them to talk to multiple JMS >> servers. Maybe something like DNS round-robin would suffice? >> >> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Erik Froese <erik.fro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Do we need to cluster activemq? Can't each app server service its own >> queues? >> Erik >> >> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Carl Hall <c...@hallwaytech.com> wrote: >>> What Erik describes has been on the dev wish list for a little while now. >>> Moving to an event-driven model would allow us to build out concurrency >>> but >>> there also comes the question of clustering ActiveMQ. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:27 AM, Erik Froese <erik.fro...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey David, >>>> >>>> The code is not clustered. >>>> >>>> You'd need to write an event listener that would fire when new content >>>> is uploaded. It would put the content ids on a JMS queue. Then >>>> implement a ContentFetcher that grabs a message off of the queue and >>>> wire that into the PPI. Events and Messages are not clustered in OAE >>>> (AFAIK) so this would have to be run on each app server. >>>> >>>> While we're in event-land it'd be nice to be able to regenerate a >>>> preview when a content body is updated. I'm not sure if this is >>>> possible yet. >>>> >>>> I'm not sure how we'd limit the CPU usage yet either. You could manage >>>> the quartz schedule that runs the PPI. >>>> >>>> We can also disable concurrent executions of the job. >>>> >>>> Erik >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Roma, David <dr...@csu.edu.au> wrote: >>>> > Awesome news Erik! >>>> > >>>> > Our Ops guys will be stoked when we can get this in.. A couple of >>>> > questions from someone who hasn't looked at the code or read too >>>> > deeply.... >>>> > - Does it support clustering >>>> > -e.g. can we just run it side by side on each of our app >>>> > servers >>>> > and they will play nice sharing out processing jobs? >>>> > -will it affect performance of the app servers much? Can we >>>> > limit the preview processor to say 10%cpu and 500mb ram or low priority >>>> > threads or limit the number of items to process or something? This >>>> > would >>>> > make for a nice simple deployment that wouldn't threaten the app server >>>> > stability. >>>> > >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > Dave. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>> > From: oae-dev-boun...@collab.sakaiproject.org >>>> > [mailto:oae-dev-boun...@collab.sakaiproject.org] On Behalf Of Erik >>>> > Froese >>>> > Sent: Thursday, 12 July 2012 2:37 AM >>>> > To: Carl Hall >>>> > Cc: oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org; Clay Fenlason >>>> > Subject: Re: [oae-dev] Moving the preview processor to java >>>> > >>>> > Hey everyone, >>>> > >>>> > Its been a few months but I actually implemented the Java preview >>>> > processor as an OSGi bundle. I filed a ticket for it [1] >>>> > >>>> > I'm not sure where to go from here. Is this something that could be >>>> > included POST 1.4.0? >>>> > Should I open a PR so we can review the code? If so, PR against which >>>> > branch? >>>> > >>>> > Either way, have a look, give it a go. We'll probably wind up using it >>>> > at rSmart. >>>> > >>>> > Erik >>>> > >>>> > [1] https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/KERN-3021 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Carl Hall <c...@hallwaytech.com> >>>> > wrote: >>>> >> I totally agree that we should ally ourselves with other communities. >>>> >> I >>>> >> see >>>> >> where we get docsplit from DocumentCloud[1] and we use several other >>>> >> libraries for processing that they've most likely contributed to. >>>> >> The Java approach is very little custom code compared to the libraries >>>> >> we're >>>> >> getting from Apache (tika, sanselan, commons, pdfbox), so we would >>>> >> still >>>> >> building on the shoulders of our friendly community giants. >>>> >> >>>> >> 1 https://github.com/documentcloud/docsplit >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 5:43 AM, John Norman <j...@caret.cam.ac.uk> >>>> >> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> My recollection (perhaps wrong) is that we got this from Document >>>> >>> Cloud >>>> >>> and I /think/ Chris Roby found it. Document Cloud seems a very >>>> >>> relevant and >>>> >>> valuable project. If we were able to help them while helping >>>> >>> ourselves, >>>> >>> other good things could come from the relationship. My general point >>>> >>> is that >>>> >>> we are thin on resources and so, in principle, symbiotic >>>> >>> relationships >>>> >>> are >>>> >>> helpful. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> http://www.documentcloud.org/home >>>> >>> >>>> >>> John >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On 13 Apr 2012, at 17:03, Carl Hall <c...@hallwaytech.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I agree with Daniel that our modifications to the preview processor >>>> >>> have >>>> >>> put its ownership square on us. Was there a community that this >>>> >>> script >>>> >>> was >>>> >>> borrowed from? I thought it was original development that uses >>>> >>> various >>>> >>> external libraries to do the actual work. This is the approach that >>>> >>> Erik is >>>> >>> taking with the rewrite using things like Tika (text extraction), >>>> >>> Sanselan >>>> >>> (images) and a Java port of the python topia.termextract library. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I certainly don't deny the speed of development that was realized in >>>> >>> creating the PP but the current state of the code is a mess at best. >>>> >>> Reuse >>>> >>> of libraries in Java is showing a fast rewrite with very little >>>> >>> managed code >>>> >>> on our part. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Daniel Parry >>>> >>> <dan...@caret.cam.ac.uk> >>>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 04:21:36PM -0400, Clay Fenlason wrote: >>>> >>>> > I think this response is at best orthogonal to the point John's >>>> >>>> > trying >>>> >>>> > to raise, though I gather this kind of reaction must come from a >>>> >>>> > buildup of some real frustration around the PP, which I don't mean >>>> >>>> > to >>>> >>>> > discount. I also think John was pretty clear about what he was >>>> >>>> > suggesting: that there be a conversation with the community we got >>>> >>>> > the >>>> >>>> > PP from, if the conversation hasn't happened already, to see if >>>> >>>> > there >>>> >>>> > might still be a way to work together before we decide to just own >>>> >>>> > it >>>> >>>> > ourselves. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'd suggest the way that the preview processor was being extended >>>> >>>> (initially a >>>> >>>> python server add on, followed by a ruby rewrite for tag extraction) >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> variety of ruby versions that deployers were using and the methods >>>> >>>> used >>>> >>>> to >>>> >>>> deploy it were indicative of a) the OAE community already 'owning' >>>> >>>> the PP >>>> >>>> and b) >>>> >>>> as has already been pointed out some standardization needed >>>> >>>> restoring >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> additional functionality added for deployers. Hence, the list was >>>> >>>> pinged[0] a >>>> >>>> while back to ask about standardizing and extending in java. I'm not >>>> >>>> sure >>>> >>>> of any >>>> >>>> other way to contact the original PP community or if such a >>>> >>>> community >>>> >>>> separate >>>> >>>> to OAE even still exists? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Daniel >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> [0] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/oae-dev/2012-April/001677.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> --| Daniel Parry: dan...@caret.cam.ac.uk. www.caret.cam.ac.uk/ |-- >>>> >>>> "Of all the things a leader should fear, complacency should >>>> >>>> head the list." [John C. Maxwell] >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>>> oae-dev mailing list >>>> >>>> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >>>> >>>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>> oae-dev mailing list >>>> >>> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >>>> >>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>> >> oae-dev mailing list >>>> >> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >>>> >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >>>> >> >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > oae-dev mailing list >>>> > oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >>>> > http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >>>> > Charles Sturt University >>>> > >>>> > | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | >>>> > ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | >>>> > >>>> > LEGAL NOTICE >>>> > This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the >>>> > use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of >>>> > this >>>> > email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it >>>> > or >>>> > disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by >>>> > reason >>>> > of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects >>>> > before >>>> > opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability for >>>> > viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email >>>> > transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated >>>> > email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a >>>> > legitimate >>>> > email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this email are >>>> > not >>>> > necessarily those of CSU. >>>> > >>>> > Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The >>>> > Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 ABN: 83 878 >>>> > 708 >>>> > 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT) >>>> > >>>> > Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 >>>> > Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: >>>> > www.peqab.ca >>>> > >>>> > Consider the environment before printing this email. >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> oae-dev mailing list >> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> oae-dev mailing list >> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> oae-dev mailing list >> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> oae-dev mailing list >> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> oae-dev mailing list >> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> oae-dev mailing list >> oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev >> _______________________________________________ oae-dev mailing list oae-dev@collab.sakaiproject.org http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/oae-dev
