stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <>
Subject Re: [RFC] build result views
Date Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:50:06 GMT
Farid Zaripov wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 6:18 AM
>> To:
>> Subject: [RFC] build result views
>> I'm looking for feedback on the two sets of nightly result 
>> pages we currently publish:
>> and
>> Specifically, I'm wondering what would people think about 
>> replacing the first page with the second, or something like 
>> it. Do you find yourself using the first page more or do you 
>> prefer the second one, and why?
>   The first page is useful to see the overall status of the library.
> I'm using it just for sure that Windows builds are green :)

:) That's how I've been using it too. The danger of colorizing
entire builds the way we do on that page is in making it easy
to miss important failures occurring only in a small number of
tests. I.e., you might see green even when a critical piece of
the library is broken (recall the recent binary incompatibility
with XLC++ exception).

Anyway, sounds like adding colorization either to builds.html
or to the Logs and Columns table on each Multi-platform Test
Result View is one enhancement you'd like to see, correct?

What about data? Do you use any of the data from the colorized
page? E.g., the number of components (examples, tests, locales)
vs the number of those that failed? I personally don't think
they are terribly useful but adding them shouldn't be too hard.
I do plan on adding the duration column (with a lot more detail,
such as how long the library took to build in user, system, and
wall clock time, and the same for all examples, the test driver,
tests, and locales). Anything else?

>   Of cource the second page is more convinient to see what
> examples or tests are failed and how these fails dependent
> from the build type.
>   I would like to have the possibility to merge the results of the
> multiple platforms into the one page, i.e.:
> - all windows builds (MSVC and ICC);
> - all MSVC builds;
> - all ICC/windows builds;
> - all ICC builds (windows and linux);
> - all MSVC 8.0 build + all gcc 4.2.0 builds;

This is something I'd like to be able to do as well, and I have
in a small number of cases. It can easily be done by changing
the genxviews script to generate whatever combination of builds
you need (we should move the data out of the script to make it
possible to do this without modifying the script itself).

After making the changes you just run your custom genxviews like

   $ genxviews > $HOME/public_html/stdcxx/results/builds.html

Of course, the ultimate implementation would let you do it on
demand (e.g., as you suggest below).

One thing to keep in mind is that the more builds you squeeze on
a page the harder it becomes to see them all at the same time. At
a certain point it starts to defeat the purpose of the page because
you end up scrolling it left and right to see the results for all
the platforms.

> ...
>   It might be realized as the current page
> (
> but with the checkboxes on the each line of the table and button
> "Next" somewhere on the page.

That would be pretty cool. The only thing is that generating the
pages takes quite a bit of time (you can see how long in the Time
column), so you might have to wait a few minutes to get the results
for a custom selection. We could probably optimize it to just a few
seconds by pre-processing the individual logs so as not to make the
script work so hard.


>> If neither, how do you 
>> analyze build results and why do you find your system 
>> preferable to what we have? What does your ideal result page 
>> look like? What data should it show and how should it be presented?
> Farid.

View raw message