Re: [g-a-devel] AT-SPI D-Bus investigation

[Mark Doffman <mark doffman codethink co uk>]

Hi Li, Steve,

I'm afraid I'm without an OpenSolaris box at the moment :). Give it some
time and that might change. Instead I have modified the IDL generation
tool to place some logging calls in all of the stub functions, which
seems to work ok. Not too worried about overhead, just want to find out
what most of the activity on the AT-SPI interface consists of. Are the
test cases checked into the GOK SVN tree? 

Steve: Yes I think the fact that it ends up calling at-spi does make it
worth testing. Its more the type of calls made that I want to look at,
rather than the performance of cspi itself. In all the ORBit performance
tests I have done so far, the client side of the interface was using the
Python bindings.  

Thanks

Mark

On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 10:18 +0000, Steve Lee wrote:
> I'm wondering how useful the results for cspi are seeing that it has
> been declared obsolete AFAIK? Does the fact that it ends up calling
> at-spi outweigh any possible differences in the way it works?
> 
> Steve Lee
> 
> On 23/11/2007, Li Yuan <Li Yuan sun com> wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > We have about 35 gok test cases. And I can write a D-trace script to
> > count function calls in cspi or at-spi-registryd. But you need to have
> > an OpenSolaris box to run D-trace script. :-)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Li
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 16:58 +0000, Mark Doffman wrote:
> > > I intend to continue with some more performance testing, for the
> > > moment
> > > I would like to profile the use of the AT-SPI interface made by GOK.
> > > Does anyone know of some GOK tests that will give a good idea of the
> > > calls made during normal use?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
> > Gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
> >
> 
>