[Bloat] Announcing Flent (formerly netperf-wrapper) v0.10.0

[Dave Taht]

On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke at toke.dk> wrote:
> Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> well,1) we need a flent-devel mailing list... no need to have this
>> discussion so widely here..
>
> Yup, will try to set one up soonish. ENOTIME so far.
>
>> I agree that *you* do not want to maintain two plotting
>> implementations inside flent. But:
>>
>> I am hugely in favor of various implementations of stuff that can read
>> the file format and do various (new and interesting) things with it.
>> The number of python-matplotlib capable developers is small. The
>> number of javascript capable developers (and web based plotting tools)
>> is huge. Other means of dealing with the data (postgres json) are also
>> needed.
>
> Oh, sure, quite happy with more implementations. That was option 3.
> However, until someone actually starts working on such an implementation
> this is all hypothetical. I'm happy to discuss interoperability issues
> when such an implementation actually materialises :)

Well, no. Usually we discuss interop issues in file and wire formats
in light of *possible* implementations... and a web implementation of
some plotting tools is a highly desirable implementation.


>> So the json.gz file format WAS readable and translatable by many web
>> servers and browsers, flent is not (so far as I know, even with adding
>> a mime type.)
>
> Yes, but .json.gz also makes it hard to distinguish from other random
> gzip'ed json data.

All in favor of .flent.gz. and .flent.bz. Not .flent the compressed
json encoded format.

> I'd rather have a separate file extension for offline
> storage, and then solve the web problem as a separate problem, which as
> far as I'm concerned is orthogonal to the encoding of the files on disk.
> The important thing is the structure of the JSON object, not which
> compression format and file extension it is stored in.
>
>> I liked the original web based prototype, it needed a db back end, but
>> it seemed like a promising start.
>
> And odds are that db back end is going to store the JSON object in its
> own encoding anyway, hence rendering this whole discussion moot... :)

And odds are that the db backend would only store the metadata and not
the raw data.

>> I don't have a lot of hope for the canvas approach, personally. Too
>> many abstractions.
>
> Yeah, I'm sceptical, but willing to give it the benefit of the doubt if
> it means I have to write less code...

Goal here is to make it as easy as possible for *others* to write code.

>> Personally what I most prefer is that the "expert" implementation be
>> blazing fast!
>
> Yes, well, matplotlib is not exactly a cheetah...

Yes, on my bad days, waiting for 100+ plots to render on my 16 core
box, I dream of rewriting the whole thing in go and parallizing the
hell out of it, for starters.

>
> -Toke



-- 
Dave Täht
Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67