|
|
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | [[TPTP/Wiki_Usage_Ruls]] | | [[TPTP/Wiki_Usage_Ruls]] |
| | | | |
| − | [[TPTP/Profiler | Profiler]] | + | [[TPTP/Wiki_Tips]] |
| | | | |
| − | | + | [[TPTP_Profiler | Profiler]] |
| − | | + | |
| − | ==Notes==
| + | |
| − | ===Expectation===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Our expectation from survey ==
| + | |
| − | If brief, we want to change profiler and support with feedback for product. :)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | But if it takes more seriously.
| + | |
| − | TPTP Profiler is universal tool which provides broad range of functionality for applications tuning (execution, heap, threading). But as any other universal tools it suffers from difficulties with solving specific narrow tasks. Set of them should be almost unlimited and we aren't going to develop solution for all of them. In this area our goal is to define limited set of such task in collaboration with their Lead User for each participated project. If users don't see specific profiling task we can assist them in this quest, at least profiler allows investigate not only execution but also heap usage and threading. We can suppose that desired task could be something like filtering narrow set of events, specific execution model, specific requirements for data depiction (e.g. reverse call tree) or specific analytical features. When tasks will be specified and documented in Wiki we can consent on most convenient solution for their carrying out, in other words we can define the sequence of action which user should do to perform the task and way how information should be presented during it.
| + | |
| − | We hope that making TPTP valuable as tool at least in some specific appliances can increase amount of users and attracts attention.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Search for helpful project specific usage scenarios and defining solutions for them are only part of our expectations.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Also we want Lead Users bit by bit integrates TPTP Profiler in projects development process. At beginning it can cause complications but than all integration issues will be resolved we can research process with continues profiling during development, concretize role of each type of profiling and put it in certain development phase.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Of course starting point for participation in survey is downloading of "allinone" bundle and trying profiler but it is crucial for achieving gaols of survey to put TPTP in every day development, even periodic usage of new issued releases hardly can show requirements for profiler integration.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Brief list of expectations:
| + | |
| − | # Set of helpful project specific profiling tasks definition.
| + | |
| − | # Joint resolution about the best way for such tasks carrying out in TPTP.
| + | |
| − | # Iterative development with close collaboration for product evaluation.
| + | |
| − | # Filing Bugzillas against TPTP (errors, enhancements requests)
| + | |
| − | # Provide feedback for "getting started" materials, tutorials and documentation.
| + | |
