On 22/07/10 11:45 +0200, Mathias Behrle wrote: > * Betr.: " Re: [tryton-dev] EP2010 and Tryton Performance Improvements" (Thu, > 22 Jul 2010 09:35:25 +0200): > > > > Now, back to the issue at hand: > > > > > > Tryton code (IMHO) is mature enough for us to start thinking of > > > performance > > > improvements. As discussed with Cedrik, I request all of you to propose or > > > update tickets with the file and line number(s) of code where you think > > > there is a performance issue. This collection could later be discussed and > > > optimised. > > > > > > @cedk, could you recommend if we should start thinking of patches/diff > > > also, > > > or just collect the points where we think the issues exist. > > > > I think we should focus first on patern that has issues. > > And after when we decide the right way to fix, we fix it with patch all over > > the place. > > AFAIS we have improvements in the client on displaying large number of > records, > but there are still issues (especially on large numbers of records in a > o2m). I think e.g. https://bugs.tryton.org/roundup/issue1623 could be a real > important improvement. So for me performance issues are already collected > under > issue type performance . > > > > Issue for Python optimisation: https://bugs.tryton.org/roundup/issue1627 > > > <https://bugs.tryton.org/roundup/issue1627>Issue for SQL optimisation: > > > https://bugs.tryton.org/roundup/issue1628 > > Such issue can only serve to collect links to other issues. Is this intended? > So > far we use roundup in an 'atomic' way, i.e. one issue per entry. Collecting > several issues under one issue contradicts the workflow of roundup.
Yes. The best is to create a new issue and added as Superseder on above issue. -- Cédric Krier B2CK SPRL Rue de Rotterdam, 4 4000 Liège Belgium Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Email/Jabber: [email protected] Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
pgpfcetl1bQyl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
