oodt-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: Size of psc-opsui
Date Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:30:11 GMT
I’m down to help investigate this. Let’s create some JIRAs :)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Chief Architect
Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++





-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi>
Reply-To: "dev@oodt.apache.org" <dev@oodt.apache.org>
Date: Friday, October 30, 2015 at 4:57 AM
To: "dev@oodt.apache.org" <dev@oodt.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Size of psc-opsui

>Right, so in here:
>
>https://github.com/apache/oodt/blob/master/webapp/components/pom.xml
>
>You just have plain calls to the various OODT components that the webapps
>require to function.
>
>So, In the wmonitor I seen an exclusion on cas-filemgr which is the sort
>of
>thing I was expecting.
>
>I don't see how, for example, in the file manager you can scope a
>dependency, because surely when you build the core component for
>deployment
>in Radix or something you want the compile time dependencies in the
>filemgr
>lib directory, which means you can't scope it out AFAIK.
>
>In which case, you need to figure out which dependencies the webapps will
>never use, and exclude them.
>
>That said, your file manager webapp uses an API to communicate with the
>file manager server from what I understand. So if the filemanager was down
>opsui would still function, just not communicate with the FM. If that is
>the case, is there a requirement to bundle the file manager at all, or
>just
>create a light layer that allows for bidirectional communication with the
>file manager itself?
>
>Because its Wicket and JSP's there is a requirement there for OpsUI to use
>the jar, but you could swap it out for REST/JSON and have 0 dependency on
>the file manager if you are pushing all operations to it and not doing
>anything inside OpsUI.... If you can follow any of that rambling.
>
>
>Tom
>
>On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
>lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What your saying about te Mars bars is true.
>> On the remainder...
>> 220 days is something that everyone on this list should take notice of.
>> This is serious reductions in what is commonly acknowledged throughout
>>our
>> industry as technical debt.
>> @Tom,
>> Unpredictable builds in XMLRPC are OK... Because there are around 20 or
>>so
>> people the see the builds when they happen. We can fix them reasonable
>> quickly or else realize that there is an environment error.
>>
>> On the other hand, what are we doing about these friggin war's?
>>
>> I did a bit of investigation. However I did not track it to parent Pom.
>>I
>> don't think we have any scope set for many native dependencies e.g. OODT
>> deps inheriting from another OODT module.  I think scope would help us
>> reduce the size of these beasts/
>>
>> On Friday, October 30, 2015, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>>
>> > On a slightly different note, seen Sonar, I've used every trick in the
>> > book(Idea Analysis and fixing etc) and worked my nads off trying to
>>get
>> the
>> > Tech Debt number down, and after whats probably 5 full days of work on
>> it,
>> > I've got rid of...... 220 days. Grim.
>> >
>> > Also because xmlrpc isn't mocked sometimes when the builds run on the
>> same
>> > box, you get the tests failing because of the port conflicts which
>> doesn't
>> > help.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
>> > <javascript:;>>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I was thinking more a Haggis followed by 2 battered mars bars... but
>> > > either way, not sure scope is particularly useful if you look at the
>> poms
>> > > they are dragged in as transient dependencies by the various OODT
>> > modules,
>> > > it might be more of a big fat, <exclude> block for the stuff that
>>wont
>> > get
>> > > used by the webapps.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
>> > > lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> You bet they are heavy...
>> > >> Heavy as a sumo wrestler after eating five fish suppers and tanning
>> six
>> > >> bottles of fine french wine. Then washing it down with 2 mars bars
>> and a
>> > >> can of diet coca cola.
>> > >> <scope> is our friend.
>> > >>
>> > >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Tom Barber
>><tom.barber@meteorite.bi
>> > <javascript:;>>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Looking at some of the dependencies in the fmbrowser for
>>example, do
>> > you
>> > >> > need the full aws java sdk? (12mb), poi xml schemas(5.4mb),
>>netcdf
>> is
>> > >> 11mb
>> > >> > although I assume that is required.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Thats 28mb of dependencies without even trying, they are pretty
>> heavy
>> > >> > weight.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Tom
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
>> > >> > chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > Ack if we can reduce that would be stellar
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Sent from my iPhone
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > > On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:12 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
>> > >> > > lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > No way... so it cas-product-0.11-20151028.223453-48.war
>> > >> > > > 60777 KB
>> > >> > > > I just cleared my ~/.m2 cache and by God these artifacts
make
>> Moby
>> > >> > Dick's
>> > >> > > > forehead look like the tails side of a one pence piece..
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney
<
>> > >> > > > lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >> OK so it turns out that
>> pcs-services-0.11-20151028.223756-49.war
>> > is
>> > >> > > around
>> > >> > > >> the same size
>> > >> > > >> 62186 KB
>> > >> > > >> These are HUGE for web application containers.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney
<
>> > >> > > >> lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
wrote:
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> Hi Folks,
>> > >> > > >>> I am slightly concerned that the pcs-opsui .war
artifact
>>is as
>> > >> large
>> > >> > as
>> > >> > > >>> Aundrey The Giants left arse cheek... 67831KB's
to be
>>precise.
>> > >> > > >>> I wonder if there is something we can do about
this. None
>>of
>> the
>> > >> OODT
>> > >> > > >>> dependencies have any <scope> so I wonder
if there is
>>actual
>> > >> scope to
>> > >> > > >>> reduce the soze of the artifact.
>> > >> > > >>> Lewis
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> --
>> > >> > > >>> *Lewis*
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> --
>> > >> > > >> *Lewis*
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > --
>> > >> > > > *Lewis*
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> *Lewis*
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Lewis*
>>

Mime
View raw message