Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove entries < 0.2% of total runtime #71

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jonashaag
Copy link

If you have a lot of files (say, thousands), many of them aren't going to account for more than 0.X% of total runtime. However they will be rendered in the result list, making the UI load for a very long time or crash.

This is a working PoC of removing any entry <0.2% of total runtime from the results prior to serving them to the UI.

Another approach may be to include only the top 99% (or whatever) time consumers, but this didn't work as well as the fixed threshold approach.

@nvdv
Copy link
Owner

nvdv commented Nov 6, 2017

Thanks!
This one is tricky, because code heatmap was designed not with thousands of files in mind. The idea was to see time distribution over the source code how it is and if the scope is too large - you just can limit it by profiling less code or use another view.

@jonashaag
Copy link
Author

Well maybe I don't know which files spend most time beforehand. Why not simply filter it afterwards? This kind of filter makes sense for all visualisations – you will probably want to remove this kind of noise anyways.

@nvdv
Copy link
Owner

nvdv commented Nov 7, 2017

Also current code heatmap can operate as coverage tool (it displays line execution count), so changing it's behaviour as suggested will disable that. One of possible options is enabling/disabling heatmap rendering for specific files (e.g. with checkbox), but it's not as straightforward as it seems.

@jonashaag
Copy link
Author

Or add a CLI flag for the threshold

@nvdv
Copy link
Owner

nvdv commented Nov 9, 2017

This is also tricky since CLI is already cluttered 😄

@nvdv nvdv closed this Jan 14, 2018
@jonashaag
Copy link
Author

I'm sorry to see you decided against this :(

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants