Performance/Meetings/2008 01
Performance/Meetings/2008/01/31
Meeting Minutes
IRC Meeting of Sun Microsystems (StarOffice) with RedFlag2000 and the Community ??
Performance Project
Date: 2008/01/31
Time: 15:43– 17:29
Meeting No.:
Agenda:
(15:54:39) kuangliang: hello guys
(16:04:13) kuangliang: it's time to start!
(16:09:22) LiHeng: where is liangjun?
(16:09:44) yugq: just a minute
(16:10:01) liangjun: hello
(16:11:44) LiHeng: i just sell the alarm clock for you , later !!:(
(16:12:22) LiHeng: are you ready for this meeting?
(16:12:30) yugq: i'm sorry. i'll remember this from now on.
(16:13:44) LiHeng: please check agenda in mailbox
(16:14:16) yugq: maybe i can say more later when i did do many things. but now, i have little to say.
(16:14:42) yugq: :-(
(16:16:31) LiHeng: ok,i direct meeting this time
(16:16:54) LiHeng: please, talk about you idea
(16:19:02) LiHeng: i want to create independent CWS for performance project , do you think it's a right idea
(16:19:25) yugq: i think it's nessisary.
(16:19:31) LiHeng: why?
(16:19:46) LiHeng: in your points
(16:20:29) liangjun: :)
(16:20:58) yugq: because when you do some optimizations on OO, you are not sure the statable of OO.
(16:21:55) yugq: we need provide thease performance versions to test stuff and let them do some test.
(16:22:29) yugq: then we can put this optimization wins to release versions.
(16:23:02) LiHeng: ok,please show these words in meeting soon
(16:23:27) yugq: ok
(16:26:14) yugq: and another reason is: performance versions is not synchronous with OO developing version.
(16:29:06) yugq: we can not put optimize achievements to new version immediately. so we need performance version to record our achievements.
(16:34:42) mhu: Hi all, sorry for being late
(16:34:42) LiHeng: hello, mhu!
(16:35:08) yugq: hi all
(16:35:22) liangjun: hello :-D
(16:35:41) LiHeng: mhu:xiuzhi can't attend this meeting ,
(16:36:02) mhu: LiHeng: yes, I've seen his email
(16:36:28) LiHeng: mhu: do you have some tipoc for this time?
(16:37:09) mhu: no nothing more than you have in your agenda
(16:37:47) LiHeng: ok , we are beginning :)1.Independent CWS for performance project on OO3.0 and subsequent versions.
(16:38:23) LiHeng: mhu: we want to create Independent CWS for performance project on every version
(16:39:15) mhu: yes, no problem at all. you can create as many cws'ses as you like, for what purpose you like
(16:39:44) mhu: and yes, creating a cws for performance improvements surely makes sens.
(16:40:45) LiHeng: mhu: thank you, but we need combine some effectual change to major version,
(16:41:37) mhu: LiHeng: can you explain the "but" ?
(16:42:52) LiHeng: LiHeng: i can't be sure the time to check out dev-version for the CWS
(16:43:11) LiHeng: mhu: i can't be sure the time to check out dev-version for the CWS
(16:43:44) LiHeng: mhu:you know the problem of performance is dynamic
(16:44:35) LiHeng: mhu:if we checkout early, some change would be void
(16:44:43) mhu: I'm not yet sure, I understand where you see what problem, sorry.
(16:46:11) mhu: ...or, are you saying that other changes might influence your improvements?
(16:46:28) LiHeng: mhu:yes,:) i mean that we need you help for decided the time we checkout the
(16:46:32) mhu: ...if development happens in parallel
(16:46:48) mhu: okay, now I seem to understand
(16:46:57) mhu: ...but...
(16:47:53) mhu: ...I think it is unavoidable that multiple developments happen in parallel. that is the purpose of working with CWS'ses.
(16:49:05) LiHeng: yes ,but performance maybe changed after change for function
(16:49:14) mhu: so, there will surely be other projects targeted at 3.0 that would wish others would not always change so much (the packaging restructuring project, e.g.)
(16:50:36) LiHeng: Is there a period that function not be changed be for release?
(16:50:36) mhu: yes, I understand. But how can parallel changes be avoided? In fact, that's what we want: many developers working simultaneously on the code.
(16:51:26) mhu: yes, there is a period that no changes are accepted: that is after "code freeze", and your changes also would be rejected :-)
(16:53:23) LiHeng: mhu:so , if we have some change can improve more speed for OO, do you think we can have a period , maybe "pre-code freeze"?
(16:53:58) mhu: I still have the idea, that our performance improvement changes can happen in parallel with other changes...
(16:54:29) mhu: ...and I don't think that we need a period where no other change goes in.
(16:55:06) LiHeng: ok, we try to do it so :)
(16:56:38) mhu: if there is an area which you find critcial, we can (a) either monitor that area for other changes and / or (b) talk to the developer(s) that are reponsible for that other area to help us and avoid changes that we think are counter productive.
(16:57:10) LiHeng: thank you!
(16:57:23) mhu: maybe, what I think is, we work with them and not against them?
(16:57:48) LiHeng: ok, we try first ;)
(16:58:23) LiHeng: go next
(16:58:33) mhu: okay. and as I said, if there's something really critical, we'll find a way.
(16:59:11) LiHeng: Put all suggestions and issues in order, make cases for them , and public on wiki
(16:59:41) mhu: yes, sounds like a plan :-)
(17:01:07) mhu: do you already have details?
(17:01:13) LiHeng: mhu:yes , when we changed wiki we find many suggestions and issues for performance, we want to put them in order, and make standart cases
(17:01:37) mhu: ah, yes. that's good I think.
(17:02:15) LiHeng: do you have some idea for this?:)
(17:04:20) yugq: there are issue categories in wiki page before. i think those categories are ok.
(17:04:40) mhu: sorry, i've just looked over the "performance" wiki page. No, I don't have an immediate idea.
(17:04:48) yugq: we may change some if we need.
(17:05:43) mhu: yes, the categories look generally okay. If you find something to add / change, please do so.
(17:05:55) yugq: the most big thing is test case.
(17:06:10) LiHeng: mhu:we can rebuild wiki first ,and I hope you can help us to check them
(17:06:46) mhu: LiHeng: yes, of course. just point me to something, and I'll check it.
(17:06:48) yugq: categories look good, maybe contents mess a little.:P
(17:07:19) LiHeng: yugq:it is just our jobs
(17:07:28) mhu: yes, there's some "mess", mostly remaining from some expermients
(17:07:37) yugq: LiHeng, yes.
(17:07:55) yugq: :)
(17:08:45) LiHeng: kuangliang:are you there?
(17:09:10) kuangliang: I am back
(17:09:32) LiHeng: mhu:can we go to next topic ?
(17:09:39) mhu: yes, please.
(17:09:46) LiHeng: 3.Further discussion of OO compiling and profiling on Solaris and SunStido Perfermance Analysis.
(17:09:56) mhu: yes...
(17:10:15) LiHeng: kuangliang please?
(17:10:28) mhu: I think, we've not had any repsonse to the email on compiler switches?
(17:11:50) mhu: I think, we may try to cross-post to dev@tools.openoffice.org, where most experts read email, and the ask them to join the performance@tools.openoffice.org list for performance related questions.
(17:12:14) LiHeng: yes, i just send a email to matle, maybe he know something about it
(17:12:17) mhu: s/the ask them/then ask tehm/
(17:12:32) mhu: s/tehm/them/
(17:12:57) LiHeng: mhu: i will send the mail again
(17:13:28) mhu: I was actually thinking of our Hamburg release engineers, which should be more familiar with the optimization compiler switches on all platforms
(17:14:07) mhu: ...and those release engineers do read (and answer) dev@tools.openoffice.org
(17:14:35) mhu: ...I think we can also convince them to read performance@tools.openoffice.org
(17:15:19) LiHeng: mhu:okay , i try to do it
(17:15:36) LiHeng: and you must help me:)
(17:15:41) mhu: LiHeng: I will also talk to them, and ask.
(17:19:50) LiHeng: ok, for SunStudio Perfermance Analysis, we will document to explanation how to using it for OO, and workout we report
(17:20:30) mhu: okay, sounds good. Have you been able to compile on Solaris now?
(17:21:12) LiHeng: yes , we aleady have a release vesion :)
(17:22:01) LiHeng: and that job we may start on April, after testing OO 2.3.1
(17:22:50) LiHeng: and 3.0
(17:24:14) LiHeng: mhu: another topic temporary
(17:24:29) LiHeng: We have 3Weeks holidays for Spring Festival, Feb 2nd to Feb 17 , so we have to cancel 2 time IRC.
(17:25:19) mhu: LiHeng: sorry, someone just disturbed me at my desk here :-(
(17:25:29) mhu: but now I'm back.
(17:26:03) mhu: I'm fine with your solaris approach (start after 2.3.1)
(17:26:35) LiHeng: and~:)We have 3Weeks holidays for Spring Festival, Feb 2nd to Feb 17 , so we have to cancel 2 time IRC.
(17:26:48) mhu: yes, Peter Junge already told me, that you are all out on Holidays...
(17:27:07) mhu: I wish you all the best, and have a good time.
(17:27:26) LiHeng: thank a lots
(17:27:39) liangjun: :)
(17:27:45) LiHeng: and anybody have some words?
(17:28:02) yugq: no
(17:28:02) kuangliang: no
(17:28:08) mhu: no
(17:28:10) liangjun: no
(17:28:24) LiHeng: mhu:okay, that's all
(17:28:46) mhu: okay, then good bye, see you in 3 weeks.
(17:28:56) LiHeng: see you in 3 weeks :)
(17:29:10) mhu: bye
(17:29:10) LiHeng: bye
(17:29:13) liangjun: bye
(17:29:16) kuangliang: bye
