913771 - [B2G][ Helix][Performance]The performance of Picture Operation is too poor

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::Gallery, defect, P2)

Description

[lecky]

User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; aff-kingsoft-ciba; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E)

Steps to reproduce:

gaia：c0ea0a4943dc8d3751b07f5b5c5d3abe06364a14  
gecko：170f9e477571127cd40997fa2abe262ed43f0e4d  
gonk-misc：ca9192d7ef6037016d4723647d86b72f7a410633

Comment 1

[lecky]

【Repro Steps*】：

Please check the test result in the attachment "Bug 913771.xlsx".

【Test Count*】：5
【Found Count*】：5

【Network environment】：NA

Comment 2

[lecky]

Attachment: Bug 913771.xlsx

Comment 3

[Dave Huseby [:huseby]]

SD Card Storage--The time for generate many Thumbnails of pictures and videos

Android 4.1 with the same hardware

1000 Pictures：
FFOS:14minutes 25 seconds
Android 4.1: 1minute 18 seconds

500 videos：
FFOS:8minutes
Android 4.1: 33seconds

Comment 4

[Dave Huseby [:huseby]]

SD Card Storage--The time for change to the next picture

expected: 300ms
actual: 441ms

Comment 5

[Dave Huseby [:huseby]]

Device Storage---The time for generate many Thumbnails of pictures and videos

Android 4.1 with the same hardware

500 Pictures：
FFOS:6 minutes 11 seconds
Android 4.1: 47 seconds

100 videos：
FFOS: 2 minutes
Android 4.1: 10seconds

Comment 6

[Dave Huseby [:huseby]]

Device Storage--The time for change to the next picture

expected: 300ms
actual: 457ms

Comment 7

[Sotaro Ikeda [:sotaro]]

To improve the video thumbnail generation, bug 873959 seems necessary.

Comment 8

[Wayne Chang [:wchang]]

Hi reporter,

Please file separate bugs for those items that are of unacceptable performance, and nominate those with hd?

Comment 9

[Maria]

Bug marked as INVALID. We'll check it again and if we find significant differences between expected and actual result in Mozilla build, we'll open a new bug per each issue with the proper priority.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Comment 10

[lecky]

Hi, We used same external SD card to compare test HD and 1.0 version.

And We find the 1.0's performance is better than HD.

and the test case is(we count three times and get the average value):

1000 pictures. ----> test item: selete next picture's time  

play vedio. ---> test item: use the same vedio, test the speed, back, pause,  play.

play music. ---> test item: use the same vedio, test the speed, back, pause,  play.

Comment 11

[lecky]

(In reply to lecky from comment #10)
> Hi, We used same external SD card to compare test HD and 1.0 version.

And
> We find the 1.0's performance is better than HD.

and the test case is(we
> count three times and get the average value):

1000 pictures. ----> test
> item: selete next picture's time  

play vedio. ---> test item: use the same
> vedio, test the speed, back, pause,  play.

play music. ---> test item: use
> the same music, test the speed, back, pause,  play

Comment 12

[Geo Mealer [:geo] -- This account is inactive after 2015-07-07]

Per comment 8 and comment 9, marking this one back as invalid. Please file separate bugs for the separate issues if they're still present.