[Pharo-dev] Tell me about your workflow

Sebastian Sastre sebastian at flowingconcept.com
Fri Dec 13 08:32:06 EST 2013


A bit.

This is from today's current version (and is not all, it's only the two biggest packages):

(MCPackage named: 'flow') workingCopy packageInfo classes size. 363.
(MCPackage named: 'flow') workingCopy packageInfo coreMethods size. 4585.

(MCPackage named: 'airflowing') workingCopy packageInfo classes size. 377.
(MCPackage named: 'airflowing') workingCopy packageInfo coreMethods size. 5818.







On Dec 13, 2013, at 11:25 AM, GOUBIER Thierry <thierry.goubier at cea.fr> wrote:

> Roassal: 3493
> 
> Number of versions in the package history: 733. Size of the version file: 202796.
> 
> Is that a lot lower than your count?
> 
> Thierry
> 
> De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces at lists.pharo.org] de la part de Sebastian Sastre [sebastian at flowingconcept.com]
> Date d'envoi : vendredi 13 décembre 2013 13:34
> À : Pharo Development List
> Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] Tell me about your workflow
> 
> how many coreMethods?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 13, 2013, at 7:00 AM, GOUBIER Thierry <thierry.goubier at cea.fr> wrote:
> 
>> Bad news. Roassal package directory has 355 entries (343 classes + a few extensions) and I don't see much of a slow down (on 3.0). It's not instantaneous, but with a bit of feedback, it doesn't seems long.
>> 
>> I'll do some profiling.
>> 
>> Thierry
>> De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces at lists.pharo.org] de la part de GOUBIER Thierry
>> Date d'envoi : jeudi 12 décembre 2013 17:07
>> À : Pharo Development List
>> Objet : [PROVENANCE INTERNET] Re: [Pharo-dev] Tell me about your workflow
>> 
>> Thanks for the pointers.
>> 
>> I'll look at Seaside/Moose/Mondrian and Roassal, because I need code I can load and save in an image without destroying the very image I use to test  (which would happen if I load Pharo10 stuff in a 3.0 image ;) ).
>> 
>> Thierry
>> 
>> De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces at lists.pharo.org] de la part de Yuriy Tymchuk [yuriy.tymchuk at me.com]
>> Date d'envoi : jeudi 12 décembre 2013 16:24
>> À : Pharo Development List
>> Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] Tell me about your workflow
>> 
>> So if you want something big and with a lot of commits you can use Pharo* in general. Pharo10 has the most versions and Pharo30Inbox is the largest one. If you want some other projects then you heve to take a look at Seaside30, Mondrian, Moose, Glamour or Roassal.
>> 
>> Uko
>> 
>> On 12 Dec 2013, at 16:20, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk at me.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Pharo10 on SmalltalkHub is humongous. You can definitely do a stress test with it :)
>>> 
>>> Uko
>>> 
>>> On 12 Dec 2013, at 15:43, GOUBIER Thierry <thierry.goubier at cea.fr> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I would need a large project, composed of one or more packages, with more than 150~200 classes, which triggers the slow read and writing times Sebastian experience. And, probably, to be complete, a long and complex commit history in git (> 100 commits).
>>>> 
>>>> I'll keep in mind the idea of creating one randomly ;)
>>>> 
>>>> Thierry
>>>> 
>>>> De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces at lists.pharo.org] de la part de Yuriy Tymchuk [yuriy.tymchuk at me.com]
>>>> Date d'envoi : jeudi 12 décembre 2013 15:37
>>>> À : Pharo Development List
>>>> Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] Tell me about your workflow
>>>> 
>>>> Are you interested in a package or a project? I can provide you information based on size, etc…
>>>> 
>>>> Uko
>>>> 
>>>> On 12 Dec 2013, at 15:30, GOUBIER Thierry <thierry.goubier at cea.fr> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I gave up running gitfiletree on 1.4 :(
>>>>> 
>>>>> It's possible to use gitfiletree from a 2.0 or a 3.0 image to browse your git repository, but testing the writing will be an issue.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My best chance would be to find a large enough package I can use on 2.0 or 3.0 to test and profile. Does anybody has a large enough package which could fit? Anything that doesn't require a NDA to read it, of course. Is Roassal large enough?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thierry
>>>>> 
>>>>> De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces at lists.pharo.org] de la part de Sebastian Sastre [sebastian at flowingconcept.com]
>>>>> Date d'envoi : jeudi 12 décembre 2013 12:12
>>>>> À : Pharo Development List
>>>>> Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] Tell me about your workflow
>>>>> 
>>>>> gee the big code package is airflowing which I have, quite conservatively, running on #14438 images
>>>>> 
>>>>>  I load filetree like this:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Gofer new
>>>>>       url: 'http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/FileTree';
>>>>>       package: 'ConfigurationOfFileTree';
>>>>>       load.
>>>>> ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfFileTree) project version: #'stable') load.
>>>>> 
>>>>> and it never complained
>>>>> 
>>>>> let me know 
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Dec 12, 2013, at 3:53 AM, GOUBIER Thierry <thierry.goubier at cea.fr> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you would be ready to profile a package save on your repository, it would be great. In the mean time, I'll make available a special gitfiletree package to test. Which version of Pharo you are using? 2.0 or 3.0?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thierry
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces at lists.pharo.org] de la part de Sebastian Sastre [sebastian at flowingconcept.com]
>>>>>> Date d'envoi : mercredi 11 décembre 2013 17:09
>>>>>> À : Pharo Development List
>>>>>> Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] Tell me about your workflow
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ok, if saving is dumping all, then 3 is confirmed? After the first commit, I'd say so.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> about 2, I don't know. I'm available to make tests and measure results
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> have a nice trip, keep us tuned about any progress
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Goubier Thierry <thierry.goubier at cea.fr> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yes, you're right in the general case.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But a solution to that general problem will take time to be implemented (time I lack at the moment, sadly) and if the main gain is a few % because it's writing the version file and the metadata for methods which are the "slow" factors, then we'll have worked hard for nothing.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If you want to help, I'd really like to see either 2- or 3- confirmed. I can produce a special gitfiletree to remove writing the metadata, that you can try on a large project temporary copy; if the slow writing (and reading) is confirmed, then this is 3-
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (But I'm leaving on a trip tomorrow early, so I have no idea of when I'll have the time to do that :( ).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thierry
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Le 11/12/2013 16:44, Sebastian Sastre a écrit :
>>>>>>>> Without entering in details, a cause for slow package write is dumping
>>>>>>>> all every time.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> For that strategy, we already have the image save which is magically fast.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So, if we make something to scan the code and write only when it's
>>>>>>>> different from what's on disk, then we would be preventing tons of
>>>>>>>> redundant writes
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> sebastian <https://about.me/sebastianconcept>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> o/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 1:43 PM, Goubier Thierry <thierry.goubier at cea.fr
>>>>>>>> <mailto:thierry.goubier at cea.fr>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Le 11/12/2013 16:27, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>> ah, and IMHO the problem is not about reading... is about writing (if it
>>>>>>>>>> has to write the metadata each time...).
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> But, personnaly, I don't know if this is the reason for the lack of
>>>>>>>>> performance...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I have three hypothesis for Sebastian problem:
>>>>>>>>> 1 - Slow read time for version metadata
>>>>>>>>> - Confirmed because of the 16 seconds wait time for reading the
>>>>>>>>> package metadata in the repository browser.
>>>>>>>>> 2 - Slow metadata write
>>>>>>>>> 3 - Slow package write
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I have an implemented solution for 1-, a very easy to implement for
>>>>>>>>> 2-, and none yet for 3-
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> So I'd really like to check if 3- is confirmed ;)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thierry
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Esteban
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Esteban Lorenzano
>>>>>>>>>> <estebanlm at gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:estebanlm at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>   Thierry, I know there is a working version... let me search...
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>   (5 mins later)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>   here:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rjsargent/CypressReferenceImplementation
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>   Dale says Richard made a metadata-less version.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>   We should take a look at that.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>   Esteban
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>   On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Goubier Thierry
>>>>>>>>>>   <thierry.goubier at cea.fr
>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:thierry.goubier at cea.fr><mailto:thierry.goubier at cea.fr>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>       Esteban, Sebastian,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>       In the filetree code, you will find a format without metadata,
>>>>>>>>>>       but it's not in use anymore.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>       If you use gitfiletree, it will write the metadata for
>>>>>>>>>>       compatibility reasons with filetree, but it will never read it
>>>>>>>>>> back.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>       I'm pushing code to make filetree robust to absence of metadata,
>>>>>>>>>>       but I haven't worked on it for a while.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>       gitfiletree has solved the problem of a slow metadata read. It
>>>>>>>>>>       does not solve any performance problem associated with
>>>>>>>>>> writing, yet.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>       Thierry
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>       Le 11/12/2013 16:12, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>           I know there is a version of filetree without metadata (more
>>>>>>>>>>           compelling
>>>>>>>>>>           for projects that will never use other formats).
>>>>>>>>>>           Dale told me that there was a preview somewhere, but I
>>>>>>>>>>           didn't tested yet
>>>>>>>>>>           (lack of time) and now I cannot find the mail...
>>>>>>>>>>           Dale, can you re-send the link?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>           cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>           Esteban
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>           On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Sebastian Sastre
>>>>>>>>>>           <sebastian at flowingconcept.com
>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:sebastian at flowingconcept.com>
>>>>>>>>>>           <mailto:sebastian at flowingconcept.com>
>>>>>>>>>>           <mailto:sebastian at __flowingconcept.com
>>>>>>>>>>           <mailto:sebastian at flowingconcept.com>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                I should breath before I type, but you probably already
>>>>>>>>>>           got that I
>>>>>>>>>>                meant /redundant writes/ (not reads)...
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                Anyway.. I was talking with Esteban and he mentions
>>>>>>>>>>           some kind of
>>>>>>>>>>                compatibility metadata.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                If I'm going to give a leap of faith to filetree repos
>>>>>>>>>>           to save code
>>>>>>>>>>                why should I care about mcz compatibility? Paying a
>>>>>>>>>>           toll for no
>>>>>>>>>>                reason is evil.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                Maybe we could make that optional so those who don't
>>>>>>>>>>           extract value
>>>>>>>>>>                from that feature can opt-out?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                sebastian <https://about.me/__sebastianconcept
>>>>>>>>>>           <https://about.me/sebastianconcept>>
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                o/
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                On Dec 11, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Sebastian Sastre
>>>>>>>>>>                <sebastian at flowingconcept.com
>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:sebastian at flowingconcept.com>
>>>>>>>>>>           <mailto:sebastian at flowingconcept.com>
>>>>>>>>>>           <mailto:sebastian at __flowingconcept.com
>>>>>>>>>>           <mailto:sebastian at flowingconcept.com>>>
>>>>>>>>>>                wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                    Hi Thierry
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                    On Dec 11, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Goubier Thierry
>>>>>>>>>>                    <thierry.goubier at cea.fr
>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:thierry.goubier at cea.fr>
>>>>>>>>>>               <mailto:thierry.goubier at cea.fr>
>>>>>>>>>>               <mailto:thierry.goubier at cea.fr
>>>>>>>>>>               <mailto:thierry.goubier at cea.fr>__>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                            I have packages (in the order of hundreds
>>>>>>>>>>                       of classes) and save
>>>>>>>>>>                            delays
>>>>>>>>>>                            and package click delays are starting to
>>>>>>>>>>                       demand patience in a
>>>>>>>>>>                            way that
>>>>>>>>>>                            doesn't feel like the right path
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                        Which operations ? I didn't remember noticing
>>>>>>>>>>                   much with 179
>>>>>>>>>>                        classes on a laptop without a SSD.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                    choose one. Just for clicking the package that will
>>>>>>>>>>               should you
>>>>>>>>>>                    UUID, version and author I need to wait ~16
>>>>>>>>>>               seconds. Sounds like a
>>>>>>>>>>                    lot of overhead for reading a small .json file.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                    But the write is the most worrisome
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                            All that is with a SSD disk, otherwise save
>>>>>>>>>>                       delays would be
>>>>>>>>>>                            /way/ beyond
>>>>>>>>>>                            unacceptable
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                        I'd like to know more, and understand the
>>>>>>>>>>                   reason, for sure. As
>>>>>>>>>>                        far as I know, filetree will rewrite the whole
>>>>>>>>>>                   package to disk
>>>>>>>>>>                        everytime... and maybe optimising that could be
>>>>>>>>>>                   the solution.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                    Well, that explains a lot. Writing all every time
>>>>>>>>>>               is the lazy
>>>>>>>>>>                    thing that's okay for a prototype and temporary
>>>>>>>>>>               code in a proof of
>>>>>>>>>>                    concept but that massive redundant reads certainly
>>>>>>>>>>               doesn't sounds
>>>>>>>>>>                    like pro software. Specially for SSD's which has a
>>>>>>>>>>               limited
>>>>>>>>>>                    quantity of writes
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                        Thierry
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                            sebastian
>>>>>>>>>>                       <https://about.me/__sebastianconcept
>>>>>>>>>>                       <https://about.me/sebastianconcept>>
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                            o/
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>                        --
>>>>>>>>>>                        Thierry Goubier
>>>>>>>>>>                        CEA list
>>>>>>>>>>                        Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps
>>>>>>>>>>                   Réel Embarqués
>>>>>>>>>>                        91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>>>>>>>>>                        France
>>>>>>>>>>                        Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92
>>>>>>>>>>                   <tel:%2B33%20%280%29%201%2069%2008%2032%2092>
>>>>>>>>>>                        <tel:%2B33%20%280%29%201%2069%__2008%2032%2092>
>>>>>>>>>>                   / 83 95
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>       --
>>>>>>>>>>       Thierry Goubier
>>>>>>>>>>       CEA list
>>>>>>>>>>       Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>>>>>>>>>>       91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>>>>>>>>>       France
>>>>>>>>>>       Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92
>>>>>>>>>>       <tel:%2B33%20%280%29%201%2069%2008%2032%2092> / 83 95
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Thierry Goubier
>>>>>>>>> CEA list
>>>>>>>>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>>>>>>>>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>>>>>>>> France
>>>>>>>>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>> Thierry Goubier
>>>>>>> CEA list
>>>>>>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>>>>>>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>>>>>> France
>>>>>>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20131213/07636a52/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list