[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Evergreen & Software Performance Analysis

[Mike Rylander]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org> wrote:

>  Hi all,
>
> I wasn't sure if I should add this to the QA discussion, but it seemed
> worthy of its own thread.
>
> During the "future of the staff client" meeting, I advocated for bringing
> in a consultant to do a software performance analysis for Evergreen to help
> us identify where the critical bottlenecks are in the system in the hopes
> that we could then identify the areas that need to be worked on to improve
> performance. At the time, I didn't have any concrete suggestions on finding
> a consultant who could take on this project, but I have since done some
> more investigation and have a couple of leads, the most promising of which
> is an individual local to Massachusetts who previously worked for many
> years at Stratus Technologies where he was involved in all levels of
> performance analysis. He now teaches graduate-level courses on performance
> evaluation and also does contract work.
>
> Now that I actually have concrete leads, I would like to get the ball
> rolling, provided there is support from the larger community. I'm not quite
> sure how this might fit in with ESI's planned QA efforts or with the
> possibility of bringing in a firm like OmniTI as Dan suggested, but my
> reading into these QA e-mails is that the focus would be on testing new
> commits.
>

I want to clarify something that Dan seems to have assumed incorrectly:
that anything ESI does is mutually exclusive with bringing in outside
expertise.  Nobody has any grounds to stop such an effort, and it would
be ridiculous to argue otherwise, words put into my mouth notwithstanding.
 The initial focus of an ESI effort will be what exists today, through
infrastructure, so that what exists tomorrow can then be tested.

As for how it would fit in, ESI would absorb and internalize any advice or
direction, just like any other community member, and work within the
community to incorporate that.

So, why have ESI involved at all?  Besides the fact that we create a
significant portion of the code, and that it benefits us as much as anyone
to have a more stable Evergreen, there is a need for ongoing, active
leadership in QA.  The fact is that it has not materialized yet, so we're
looking for a way to make that a maintainable proposition for the
community's benefit.  That means ongoing, deep integration with both
developer and user communities.  And that is not something that we can
expect from OmniTI or any other organization that is not plugged into those
communities.  Could some other organization step into that role, and
provide years of ongoing QA support?  Perhaps so, but ESI exists today and
has the Evergreen expertise needed to avoid long (and costly) ramp-up time.

The point is this, though, ESI will encourage any effort to improve
Evergreen, and is willing and able to work in the community, as we always
do, to further those efforts.

Thanks, Kathy!

-- 
Mike Rylander
 | Director of Research and Development
 | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
 | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
 | email:  miker at esilibrary.com
 | web:  http://www.esilibrary.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20130220/9ed2099f/attachment.htm>