harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sean Qiu" <sean.xx....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general][repos] Benchmark repository
Date Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:09:05 GMT
What about adding a web UI for our BTI?
I think it is natural since we have a similar one to publish our results.

Just like continuum[1], it is easier to manage.
Maybe we can get some hint from it.

Anyway, BTI is worthwhile devation.

[1] http://continuum.apache.org/

2008/4/16, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>:
> On 4/16/08, Alexey Varlamov <alexey.v.varlamov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2008/4/16, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>:
> > > On 4/16/08, Alexey Varlamov <alexey.v.varlamov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 2008/4/16, Tony Wu <wuyuehao@gmail.com>:
> > > > > Is it possible to integrate into BTI? if not we can consider the
enhanced/tools/
> > > >
> > > > There is one already in drlvm trunk, see working_vm/src/test/microbenchmark.
> > > > There is no infrastructure around, it is mere store holder for now.
> > > > Feel free to add benches there, they are not intended to be
> > > > VM-specific.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I would say opposite if they are DRLVM specific then it is OK to put
> > > them to the folder. Otherwise (i.e. they are not VM-specific) we
> > > should integrate them to BTI.
> > >
> > > Th point is that DRLVM workspace should contain only DRLVM specific
> > > tests. For example, IMO DRLVM workspace is not the right place for
> > > EHWA-API scenario.
> >
> > This is too radical position IMO. Absolute majority of tests in DRLVM
> > are functional and not impl-specific, should we move them all to BTI?
> >
>
> Yes, IMHO we should move them to BTI.
>
> The point is that any workspace (classlib/drlvm/jdktools) is not a
> repository for a set of different suites.
>
> > Sometimes convenience of using and extending is more important for
> > success. If we had appropriate infra for benchmarks I wouldn't argue,
> > but now I'm afraid most contributors would rather leave a bench-case
> > hanging in JIRA than dare to hack BTI. I'm happy to be proven wrong,
> > though.
> >
>
> "convenience of using and extending" is questionable for me in this case.
> Well, yes I agree that from position of a DRLVM developer it is more
> convenient when EHWA-API scenario is located in DRLVM workspace - no
> additional efforts are required to run it. But what about classlib
> developer who wants to run EHWA-API on J9 - she/he needs to checkout
> DRLVM workspace. Is this convenient and extensible? (Hmm, may be I was
> wrong when I insisted on integration of LDAP scenario into BTI then
> into classlibrary ;-))
>
> Seriously, if we think that using BTI is complicated for a developer
> then we should do our best and make it simpler and more convenient.
> Otherwise we finish with zoo of different suites/scenarios in several
> places.
>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
> > Regards,
> > Alexey
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Stepan.
> > >
> > > > Re integration to BTI, this would require fair amount of efforts and
> > > > usage model is not clear to me.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/15/08, Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Tony, all!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does it make sense to create special place in our repository
for
> > > > > > storing the benchmarks like this one I've used in my performance
> > > > > > researches on Harmony? It would be great to have them synchronized
in
> > > > > > repos rather than store in JIRA.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Aleksey.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Tony Wu <wuyuehao@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > > > > Aleksey,
> > > > > > >  I think keep the benchmark somewhere such as JIRA is also
ok.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Tony Wu
> > > > > China Software Development Lab, IBM
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Best Regards
Sean, Xiao Xia Qiu

China Software Development Lab, IBM

Mime
View raw message