[Chandler-dev] [Proposal] 3 Possible Hacks to Improve Performance
grant at osafoundation.org
Wed Jul 9 09:18:02 PDT 2008
Comments inline ...
On 9 Jul, 2008, at 05:17, Mimi Yin wrote:
> I know it's the 11th hour to bring up this kind of thing, but
> Keith's suggestion reminded of a different "performance-improvement"
> hack we discussed pre-Preview: to limit the amount of "legacy"
> calendar data we import and get rid of anything "older than a year".
> So there are 3 things we might be able to do to alleviate
> performance pain:
> 1. Replace weekly auto-purge with auto-export/reload. (Would this
> actually help?)
Probably. In a way, auto-export/reload is like a more thorough auto-
purge (but I believe it runs faster ;). There is some cached sharing
data we lose on export/reload, so potentially there might be
regressions introduced there. Personally, I export/reload more
frequently than most people, and I haven't noticed anything
> 2. Auto-archive anything that was triaged to DONE more than 1 year??
> - The simplest way to do this might be to take a snapshot of your
> data, export it to an Archive.chex file that is timestamped so that
> if you ever need it, you can always reload it into Chandler to take
> a look at it.
> - We could eventually add a File menu item that allowed you to
> switch easily between archived data sets and your current data set.
> (Sort of like the way Andi's repo-switch feature worked.)
Sure, this is possible, and not too difficult, though I'm not sure you
want Archive.chex files piling up automatically.
> 3. Discard anything older than 1 year
> Of course, all of these things would be optional (except for maybe
> #1) accompanied by an explanation that if you feel like Chandler is
> getting sluggish, you should do them.
This is technically possible, but I believe it would take several days
to debug and test.
> I'm loathe to start up a conversation about more features at this
> point in the process, but given the feedback we've received on
> performance, does 1.0 need to demonstrate some concrete progress on
> performance since Preview? Would the above fixes help the people who
> are feeling performance pain today? Or are they not likely to
> improve the situation by very much?
This is the $1,000,000 dollar question, eh. Sounds as if you asked the
More information about the chandler-dev