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 Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:57:50 GMT
You can get  a brief introduction to BTI from here:
http://harmony.apache.org/subcomponents/buildtest/index.html
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/buildtest/trunk/infra/README.txt

You can get a development introduction of BTI from here:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/buildtest/trunk/infra/SPEC.txt

If you want to know more implementation details about BTI, you can
refer to this document:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/buildtest/trunk/infra/dev-guide.txt

I hope this will be helpful to you.

2008/4/18, Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com>:
> So, should I make the benchmark ready for running via BTI?
>  Are there any guidelines and criteria it should meet?
>
>  Thanks,
>
> Aleksey.
>
>
>  On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Sean Qiu <sean.xx.qiu@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > 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
>  >
>


-- 
Best Regards
Sean, Xiao Xia Qiu

China Software Development Lab, IBM

Mime
View raw message