Confirmed users
381
edits
Performance/Snappy/2011-12-01: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
* do animation data after profiler is done (jrmuizel) | * do animation data after profiler is done (jrmuizel) | ||
* file bugs for product P1 responsiveness issues - lmandel | * file bugs for product P1 responsiveness issues - lmandel | ||
==Roundtable== | |||
* (dmandelin) What kinds of comparisons can we do with Telemetry, and how easily? | |||
** Example: Can we see the effect of landing a change? | |||
** Example 2: Can we do A/B testing? | |||
* (dmandelin) Closing a tab is frequently not snappy for me. What's the easiest way to diagnose this? | |||
* (Asa) I'd like to propose that we instrument and get timing data for each of the starred items starting at line 49 here These are what I consider the top primary UI features. The un-starred items are next. | |||
* (Asa) A proposal for snappy:Priority criteria: If it's primary UI, it's a priority until it's snappy. If it's secondary UI, it's only a priority if it's horrible. So, for example, performance of the Awesomebar pop-up is a priority, even if it feels OK -- it needs to be "instant". Performance of tabs the Add-ons manager is secondary UI and it's "good enough" right now so not a priority. However, performance of deleting history items, also secondary UI, is so catastrophically bad that it should be a priority. | |||
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||