[Chandler-dev] No more perf regression bugs?

Heikki Toivonen heikki at osafoundation.org
Mon Apr 16 15:34:44 PDT 2007


I've been under the impression that we cared about performance
regressions, although not (yet?) enough to back out a change that caused
one. My thought was that we'd get the bugs filed when they happened, and
analyzed the changes later to determine what caused the regression. I
also thought that it would be easier to determine the cause of the
regression (and fixing it) by working with the change information rather
than just doing regular performance work (start with profile etc.).

However, some engineers at least don't want to work with this past
change information, and won't be looking at performance bugs at all, as
far as I understand.

I'd like to know if everyone feels this way. If yes, then I can stop
filing performance regression bugs. I'd probably be able to simplify the
performance reporting tools quite a bit if we didn't care about
regressions (like maybe only reporting the absolute test results on
tbox, and nuking all other results).

If some feel perf regression bugs are usable, then I have a question
about what to do with perf regression bugs that are caused by an
engineer who does not want to look at performance regression bugs.

I am somewhat annoyed by the situation, mostly because I'd like to avoid
doing work that is considered useless. I do understand people have
different styles of approaching problems.

-- 
  Heikki Toivonen


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 254 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/chandler-dev/attachments/20070416/c412e149/signature.pgp


More information about the chandler-dev mailing list