Case of lost milliseconds

[Pradeep Singh]

Can anyone explain where are the milliseconds getting lost -

Completed 200 OK in 438ms (Views: 145.0ms | ActiveRecord: 15.0ms)

Completed 200 OK in 378ms (Views: 206.0ms | ActiveRecord: 2.0ms)

Completed 200 OK in 275ms (Views: 62.0ms | ActiveRecord: 35.0ms)

This is by far the most time consuming part of the entire request so I
am hoping to explore more.

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

[Pradeep Singh]

Any advice, comments please!

[Colin Law]

On 10 September 2012 00:31, Pradeep Singh <li...@ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Can anyone explain where are the milliseconds getting lost -
>
> Completed 200 OK in 438ms (Views: 145.0ms | ActiveRecord: 15.0ms)
>
> Completed 200 OK in 378ms (Views: 206.0ms | ActiveRecord: 2.0ms)
>
> Completed 200 OK in 275ms (Views: 62.0ms | ActiveRecord: 35.0ms)
>
> This is by far the most time consuming part of the entire request so I
> am hoping to explore more.

Have a look at the Rails Guide on performance testing for useful
information and techniques. Also google for
rails profile
for further ideas.

Colin

>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonra...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-ta...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[Pradeep Singh]

I was hoping to take a shortcut by asking about a very very specific
case. There must be some opinions out there about what all goes on
regarding this one and only one item of interest.

[Colin Law]

On 10 September 2012 21:03, Pradeep Singh <li...@ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> I was hoping to take a shortcut by asking about a very very specific
> case. There must be some opinions out there about what all goes on
> regarding this one and only one item of interest.

Since you have not quoted the previous post I have had to look back at
previous posts to remind myself what the question is. Remember this
is a mailing list not a forum, though you may be accessing it via a
forum-like interface.

I think there is no shortcut. As I understand it the log tells you
the time in ActiveRecord and the time in the views. All the rest is
all the rest. It is not trivial to work out how much is where, hence
the links I posted.

Colin

>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>

[Frederick Cheung]

On Monday, September 10, 2012 12:32:32 AM UTC+1, Ruby-Forum.com User wrote:

Can anyone explain where are the milliseconds getting lost -

Completed 200 OK in 438ms (Views: 145.0ms | ActiveRecord: 15.0ms)

Completed 200 OK in 378ms (Views: 206.0ms | ActiveRecord: 2.0ms)

Completed 200 OK in 275ms (Views: 62.0ms | ActiveRecord: 35.0ms)
 

This is by far the most time consuming part of the entire request so I
am hoping to explore more.

Views & ActiveRecord don't include time spent in the routing stack or in evaluating your controller or model code (other than then actual sql queries) or querying other datastores (mongo, elasticsearch, solr etc.)

Fred