1. Add missing comma to empty records after addition of Ann column.
2. Fix off-by-one in commit range calculation.
Release tags refer to the last commit of the release,
so there is no need to subtract 1 from them.
TBR=adg
R=adg, bradfitz
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/157120043
1. Don't interpolate missing data points,
instead just use the previous value for missing points.
Interpolation hides significant line jumps,
making it look like the jump is a result of several small changes.
2. Add annotations for significant changes.
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews, iant, rsc
https://golang.org/cl/154360046
Use single query to fetch commit runs and metric runs (instead of individual selects).
Hopefully this enables some kind of prefetching.
But more importantly it allows to work around "gaps" in commit nums,
as we only fetch data that is actually in the database
and don't try to query all commit runs in the "gap".
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews, rsc
https://golang.org/cl/159910045
Several changes as per Russ and Ian requests:
1. Fix almost broken ZoomIn/ZoomOut/Newer/Older with ability zoom in/out and move left/right w/o reloading (the 'explorer' attribute on graph).
2. Start the graph from the current release by default.
3. Allow to select the range of commits by specifying release range (e.g. go1.1 to go1.3 or go1.3 to tip).
4. Make it visually clear that you can select several benchmarks/metrics (replace select with a set of checkboxes).
5. Remove the "absolute" mode. Instead normalize all metrics to the start of the release (start becomes 1.0) and all subsequent changes are relative to it.
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews, iant, rsc
https://golang.org/cl/159980043
As per Ian request:
>> Let's clearly separate the build numbers from the runtime numbers.
>> The build numbers are interesting but there are many things that
>> affect them. The runtime numbers are presumably stable.
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews, iant, rsc
https://golang.org/cl/154440043
Initially both positive and negative changes had solid background (green and red).
Then we removed background of positive changes due to:
https://code.google.com/p/go/issues/detail?id=8624
However, Ian noted:
"I did intuitively understand that + was an increase and - was a
decrease. I did not notice how the numbers were segregated between
the third and fourth columns. Now that you point it out, it is
obvious. It would be more obvious if the numbers in the fourth column
were highlighted in green."
Give positive changes green *border* (not background),
so they are still visually distinguishable from negative even in grayscale.
This is especially beneficial for perf detail view,
because currently it looks like everything is either
negative or neutral in that view (only red and black).
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews, iant, rsc
https://golang.org/cl/159970043
It looks like the partial Commits are coming from the build breakages mails.
If you have commit A newer than commit B, then there are two code
paths depending on which reports its build result first.
For slow development, B finishes before A is committed, so when
A notices a failure it checks to see if B was okay.
That code path seems to be okay.
For submit of back-to-back changes, typically A finishes before B,
so when B notices an okay it checks to see if A failed.
That code path seems to zero the Commit for A while
trying to set its FailNotificationSent to true.
It does (did) succeed in setting FailNotificationSent to true,
it just zeroed everything else.
This CL adds code to refuse to do the datastore.Put to
update FailNotificationSent if the Commit info is incomplete.
It also tries to ignore Num=0 records, but that may not be
as important anymore.
LGTM=cmang
R=cmang
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/154080043
The UI template iterates over ResultGoHashes to display the Commit
rows. This was done for the sub-repository build view, where it
only makes sense to show a row when there's build data for it.
However, in the main page UI we do want to see if a commit has hit
the dashboard but has not yet been built.
This change causes the dashboard to show the commit row even if
there are no build results for it yet.
LGTM=bradfitz
R=bradfitz
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/153010043
This was a hold-over from when we removed install counts years ago.
All the Package entities are well-formed these days.
LGTM=dsymonds
R=dsymonds
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/138620043
This is so that we don't corrupt our commit history with reports
from old builders, after the migration to the latest build dashboard.
LGTM=dvyukov
R=dvyukov
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/130300043
Currently for every benchmark/metric we show all changes for all builders x procs.
With 4 builders and 5 procs, that's 20 changes (20 red/green boxes in a single cell).
Instead show only maximum change for every benchmark/metric.
This significantly reduces clutter in UI.
When you click on the red/green box, you can see the rest of the changes.
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/126430043
Currently appspot logs say:
delay: gob encoding failed: gob: type build.PerfChange has no exported fields
And I was thinking why it is not sending mails...
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/125480043
Currently we still see some flakes on perf dashboard (e.g. sys-stack is quite frequent).
I am planning to run real perf builder with 5 different values of GOMAXPROCS,
so we can require 3 builders to agree on a change instead of 2.
This will provide 20x improvement in flake detection.
At the same time lower noise bar from 1.2 to 1.1, as I see some real perf changes gets ignored as noise.
All these magic numbers affect only representation of data, but not the data stored in DB.
So we can continue freely tuning them later. There are no significant risks here.
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/127520044
This CL moves code from code.google.com/p/dvyukov-go-perf-dashboard,
which was previously reviewed.
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/96170043
This CL moves code from code.google.com/p/dvyukov-go-perf-dashboard,
which was previously reviewed.
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/96180043
This CL moves code from code.google.com/p/dvyukov-go-perf-dashboard,
which was previously reviewed.
UI part will be submitted separately.
LGTM=adg
R=adg
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/97260043
Only send mail to golang-dev if updating the CL fails.
R=golang-codereviews, dvyukov, minux.ma, rsc
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/43760043
Ensure that we do not split UTF-8 rune in half.
Otherwise appengine python scripts will break badly.
R=adg, r
CC=golang-dev
https://golang.org/cl/42530043
