On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Devin Teske <dte...@vicor.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 23:35 +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 09:12:34PM +0000, Devin Teske wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 22:59 +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 08:50:48PM +0000, Devin Teske wrote: >> > > Probably did something like this: >> > > >> > > time sh -c '( firefox & ); sleep 10000000' >> > > >> > > and then pressed Ctrl-C when he felt that firefox was finished >> > > loading. >> > > The moment Ctrl-C is pressed, time(1) shows how long it ran up until >> > > you >> > > pressed Ctrl-C. >> > > NOTE: Pressing Ctrl-C will not terminate the firefox instance. >> > >> > You cannot have 1/100 of seconds precision with this method. >> > This is why I am asking, seeing < 0.1 seconds difference. >> > Not to mention some methodical questions, like whether the caches were >> > warmed before the measurement by several runs before the actual >> > test. >> >> >> Really? >> >> $ time sh -c '( firefox & ); sleep 10000000' >> ^C >> >> real 0m5.270s >> user 0m0.000s >> sys 0m0.005s >> >> >> I'd call that 1/100th of a second precision, wouldn't you? >> >> HINT: Try using bash instead of csh. > (I supposed that) obvious point of my mail is that you cannot reliably > measure 1/100 second intervals when human interaction is involved. > To make it completely obvious: human has to press CTRL-C, I did not > mean reading the numbers from display. > > I hypothesized that the results would always be subjected because we > couldn't tell whether one person would consider "complete" to be "web page > loaded" versus another person might consider "complete" to be when the > window frame/decorations are drawn by the window manager. > > However, if Firefox provides a way of timing it in an objective manner... > that would surely be superior to the method I've suggested which can lag by > a few hundreds of even a few tenths of a second (depends on the subject's > ability to quickly invoke focus-follows-mouse and press Ctrl-C). > > So yeah... my suggestion isn't perfect... but is generally "good enough" if > the application you're testing doesn't provide a hook for determining when > it is officially done loading. > > Now... here's an idea that might work (since we're talking about a web > browser -- this obviously won't work for OpenOffice, though variations on > the idea can be had): > > 1. Launch Firefox from the command-line with arguments to point it at a web > page which uses JavaScript to print the current date and time in the web > page > > 2. Execute: ps axo pid,state,command,lstart | grep firefox > > 3. Calculate the time difference between the "lstart" and the time printed > in the browser. > > I do believe that should be sufficient to get accurate/objective results. > > NOTE: For OpenOffice, you could perhaps have the spreadsheet program open a > spreadsheet with a macro to display the current date/time then use the > lstart data from ps(1) to calculate the results. Similarly, you could have > OpenOffice.org Writer open a document with a header-macro to display the > current date/time. > -- > Devin
So for both I took the simplest approach . I spent to much time on looking for more exotic solutions. This seamed to be the easiest to run and somewhat os / platform agnostic. 1. time application " time firefox" 2. kill it when its fully loaded. * 3. record time 4. rerun test 10 times make an average to normalize my response time in closing the application. * I have the window manager open the window in the same place so I could be ready to hit the close widget. * For firefox I had it set to load a local page on startup * For openoffice I waited till it was at the "what do you want to do" window I know there is a lot of room here to debate how fast I can close and application, what's cached , how busy is the disk etc. I tried using mplayer but I did not get good results. My logic in using mplayer was that its linked to almost every audio / video lib you can name. Making it do some task, dump every frame into a jpg or remove the audio track from some video etc, should be simple to test without using a gui or requiring human input to stop it. I am stumped, at first I just was curious at first if there was any truth in the post, and wanted to know if anyone looked into it. Now I want to know how you test this correctly. -- mark saad | nones...@longcount.org _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
