In my test I’m running the same application on Windows and Mac, making the same changes to the the scene graph, with the same stylesheets. So I don’t understand the difference I’m seeing.
Scott > On Mar 15, 2016, at 12:33 PM, David Grieve <david.gri...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Sometimes the layout might introduce nodes into the scenegraph. If these new > nodes also need laid out, CSS is applied to those nodes since style can > affect layout. I would expect CSS overhead to be very small unless there are > many new nodes being added to the scene > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151756 notwithstanding) > > On 3/15/16 12:14 PM, Scott Palmer wrote: >> Is there a guideline somewhere that explains how to read the output of the >> Pulse Logger? >> >> For example, what do the two times represent in this PULSE line: >> >> PULSE: 569 [1459ms:270ms] >> >> At first I guessed is that it was PULSE: <current_pulse_#> [<layout >> time>ms:<time_for_everything_else>] >> but that doesn’t seem to hold up. >> >> What does the first (usually negative) number mean in the Layout Pass line? >> >> T23 (-1563 +1563ms): Layout Pass >> >> T23 (1 +4ms): Layout Pass >> >> >> I’ve noticed that the output has some notable differences between my Windows >> machine and my Mac. On the Mac I don’t seem to be getting the same sort of >> CSS Pass information. I get only one “CSS Pass” per pulse and it is almost >> always telling me something near 0ms: >> >> PULSE: 509 [1404ms:286ms] >> T23 (-1404 +1404ms): Layout Pass >> T23 (0 +1ms): CSS Pass >> T23 (1 +6ms): Layout Pass >> T23 (7 +4ms): Update bounds >> T23 (11 +0ms): Waiting for previous rendering >> T23 (11 +0ms): Copy state to render graph >> >> but on Windows I get two CSS Passes, one is usually 0ms, the other makes >> more sense (I’m investigating a performance issue on a Scene with >10k >> nodes, so some notable amount of CSS time is expected.): >> >> PULSE: 2578 [423ms:3362ms] >> T35 (-423 +423ms): Layout Pass >> T35 (0 +0ms): CSS Pass >> T35 (0 +0ms): Layout Pass >> T35 (0 +2725ms): CSS Pass >> T35 (2725 +402ms): Layout Pass >> T35 (3128 +25ms): Update bounds >> … >> >> This seems a bit strange, as I would think Layout and CSS would not be >> platform specific. Both systems are running 8u72. >> I’m also finding Layout times on the Mac are higher than I expected - maybe >> some CSS time has been rolled in to that log line on the Mac? >> >> Regards, >> >> Scott >
