Open
Bug 1273381
Opened 8 years ago
Updated 2 years ago
Improve bugzilla object performance by using Class::XSAccessor for object accessors
Categories
(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: General, enhancement, P2)
Tracking
()
REOPENED
People
(Reporter: dylan, Assigned: me, Mentored)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
Class::XSAccessor accessors provided via Moo are up to 500% faster than manual accessors used currently. This would have the biggest gain for ->name and ->id which are called in some cases thousands of times. attached is a benchmark script.
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•8 years ago
|
||
revised: 200% faster, there was a mistake in the previous benchmark. Still a nice to have.
Attachment #8753199 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Reporter | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8753206 -
Attachment mime type: application/x-perl → text/plain
Reporter | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Keywords: good-first-bug
Whiteboard: [good first bug]
Reporter | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Assignee: dylan → general
Mentor: dylan
Reporter | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Reporter | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: DUPLICATE → ---
Reporter | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Summary: Improve bugzilla object performance by using Class::XSAccessor and/or Moo for object accessors → Improve bugzilla object performance by using Class::XSAccessor for object accessors
Reporter | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Assignee: general → nobody
Component: Bugzilla-General → General
Product: Bugzilla → bugzilla.mozilla.org
QA Contact: default-qa
Version: 5.1 → Production
Comment 3•6 years ago
|
||
Hi, can I take this bug?
Comment 4•6 years ago
|
||
Please provide some guidance on how to go about it
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•6 years ago
|
||
Sorry, someone else has already been working on this.
Reporter | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → me
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•6 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8955956 -
Flags: review+
Reporter | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago → 6 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Reporter | ||
Comment 7•6 years ago
|
||
Whoopsy, I failed to completely test this and as a result bug 1443670 happened. I've reverted ed53ecda0546d6c639fa3d227a59ace4d57b81a5. I'll need to add tests for tracking flags, I realize.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Comment 8•5 years ago
|
||
Removing good-first-bug
keyword because team does not have bandwidth to mentor at the moment.
Keywords: good-first-bug
Comment 9•4 years ago
|
||
Is this issue still a good-first-bug and available to contribute to ?
Flags: needinfo?(dylan)
Updated•4 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [good first bug]
Comment 10•4 years ago
|
||
(In reply to kumar.ishita from comment #9)
Is this issue still a good-first-bug and available to contribute to ?
This turned out to have a bad effect in other extension code and caused a regression. I think we should hold off on this one til we fix some other the other more pressing fixes that are needed. Thanks.
Flags: needinfo?(dylan)
Comment hidden (spam) |
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•