<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-04-05 19:40 GMT+02:00 Holger Freyther <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:holger@freyther.de" target="_blank">holger@freyther.de</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
<br>
> On 03 Apr 2016, at 14:33, Nicolas Cellier <<a href="mailto:nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com">nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> +25% is certainly more than noise and a concern<br>
<br>
</span>I agree. but if it is 25% more quick but wrong, I might end up preferring the fixed VM. Do you know if there is any other public build between 3427 and 3602?<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Nope, I don't know.<br></div><div>This is once again really a good job for a bot.<br></div><div>For example, some kind soul did this:<br><a href="http://build.squeak.org/job/SqueakTrunkPerformance/performance/">http://build.squeak.org/job/SqueakTrunkPerformance/performance/</a><br><br></div><div>But I don't know which VM flavour, target architecture, image version, nor what condition triggers the performance test...<br></div><div>There's also a lot uncertainty related to load condition of the Jenkins server...<br></div><div>Ideally those kind of tests should be isolated on a dedicated machine.<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
kind regards<br>
<span class=""><font color="#888888"> holger</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>