On 7 April 2015 at 10:43, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
$ time openstack -h
snip
real0m2.491s
user0m2.378s
sys 0m0.111s
pbr should be snappy - taking 100ms to get the version is wrong.
I've now tested this.
With an egg-info present in a git tree:
python -m
On 9 April 2015 at 00:59, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.com wrote:
Another data point on how slow our libraries/CLIs can be:
$ time openstack -h
snip
real0m2.491s
user0m2.378s
sys 0m0.111s
pbr should be snappy - taking 100ms to get the version is wrong.
I have
On 9 April 2015 at 01:12, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/04/15 08:59 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
I have always considered pbr a packaging/installation time tool, and not
something that would be used at runtime. Why are we using pbr to get the
version of an installed package,
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Ryan Brown rybr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/08/2015 09:12 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 08/04/15 08:59 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-04-07 10:43:30 +1200:
On 7 April 2015 at 05:11, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com
On 04/08/2015 11:25 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Ryan Brown rybr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/08/2015 09:12 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 08/04/15 08:59 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-04-07 10:43:30 +1200:
On 7 April 2015
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-04-07 10:43:30 +1200:
On 7 April 2015 at 05:11, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Dolph Mathews dolph.math...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me
On 08/04/15 08:59 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-04-07 10:43:30 +1200:
On 7 April 2015 at 05:11, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Dolph Mathews dolph.math...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:26
On 04/08/2015 09:12 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 08/04/15 08:59 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-04-07 10:43:30 +1200:
On 7 April 2015 at 05:11, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Dolph Mathews
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 7:59 AM, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-04-07 10:43:30 +1200:
On 7 April 2015 at 05:11, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Dolph Mathews dolph.math...@gmail.com
On 7 April 2015 at 05:11, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Dolph Mathews dolph.math...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me wrote:
Jay,
Not far, IMHO. 100ms difference in startup time isn't something
Excerpts from Brant Knudson's message of 2015-04-06 09:02:55 -0500:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me wrote:
Brant,
I run profimp with and without patch
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/164066/:
And it really works well:
before 170ms:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me wrote:
Brant,
I run profimp with and without patch
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/164066/:
And it really works well:
before 170ms:
http://boris-42.github.io/keystone/before.html
after 76ms:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me wrote:
Jay,
Not far, IMHO. 100ms difference in startup time isn't something we should
spend much time optimizing. There's bigger fish to fry.
I agree that priority of this task shouldn't be critical or even high, and
that
Jay,
Not far, IMHO. 100ms difference in startup time isn't something we should
spend much time optimizing. There's bigger fish to fry.
I agree that priority of this task shouldn't be critical or even high, and
that there are other places that can be improved in OpenStack.
In other hand this
By the way, this review in question has merged and will be part of the
(soon) next release of keystone client.
--Morgan
On Monday, April 6, 2015, Dolph Mathews dolph.math...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me
On 04/06/2015 07:02 AM, Brant Knudson wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me
mailto:bo...@pavlovic.me wrote:
Brant,
I run profimp with and without patch
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/164066/:
And it really works well:
before 170ms:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Dolph Mathews dolph.math...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me wrote:
Jay,
Not far, IMHO. 100ms difference in startup time isn't something we should
spend much time optimizing. There's bigger fish to fry.
I
Brant,
I run profimp with and without patch
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/164066/:
And it really works well:
before 170ms:
http://boris-42.github.io/keystone/before.html
after 76ms:
http://boris-42.github.io/keystone/after.html
Best regards,
Boris Pavlovic
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 2:44 AM,
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me wrote:
Hi stackers,
Recently, I started working on speeding up Rally cli.
What I understand immediately is that I don't understand why it takes
700-800ms
to just run rally version command and it is impossible hard task to
Hi stackers,
Recently, I started working on speeding up Rally cli.
What I understand immediately is that I don't understand why it takes
700-800ms
to just run rally version command and it is impossible hard task to find
what takes so much time just by reading the code.
I started playing with
On 04/02/2015 06:22 PM, Brant Knudson wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Boris Pavlovic bo...@pavlovic.me wrote:
Hi stackers,
Recently, I started working on speeding up Rally cli.
What I understand immediately is that I don't understand why it takes
700-800ms
to just run rally
21 matches
Mail list logo
