IRC logs of #tryton for Thursday, 2011-09-29 #tryton log beginning Thu Sep 29 00:00:02 CEST 2011
plantianHi, what does the new search widget do?01:51
plantianoh I guess autocomplete, I guess tdp was the last file i checked out of multiple patches01:57
-!- ciupicri(~ciupicri@unaffiliated/ciupicri) has joined #tryton03:11
-!- pjstevns( has left #tryton14:34
sisalpmaking a sale order I don't read the product description in the sale order. Am I missing something ?17:55
cedksisalp: not sure to understand17:56
sisalpI'm used to oe, where product descriptions are used in order lines notes17:57
cedksisalp: I test it here and I got the description filled when I select a product in a sale line18:00
sisalpok, so I 'll make another try18:01
sisalpthe description is filled with the product name18:01
sisalpwhile notes are not filled with product description18:02
sisalpthis was the point18:02
cedksisalp: note is a free text18:02
cedksisalp: and the goal of note is not to show it to the customer18:03
sisalpok, so shouldn't decription to be filled with product decription if not empty ?18:04
sisalpand product name if description is empty ?18:05
cedksisalp: I don't think18:06
cedksisalp: I don't want to have on a sale order or invoice the manual of the product18:06
sisalpso how can I differentiate the name for the client and the supplier from the internal name ?18:06
sisalpand what is product description for ?18:07
cedksisalp: supplier name is on supplier info18:08
cedksisalp: we don't manage an internal name18:08
sisalpok, is it possible to differentiate the description between two suppliers ?18:10
cedksisalp: there is a code and a name per supplier18:11
sisalpok, my product was not buyable, it is ok18:15
cedksisalp: we show only the interesting info :-)18:15
sisalpi understand this differntiation is only for suppliers and cannot be used for clients ?18:15
sisalpor if a product can be bought, the client can be added to the list ?18:16
cedksisalp: no only for supplier18:16
cedksisalp: you know someone who is using a product name different per customer?18:17
sisalplocal subcontractors use the name of their clients (peugeot, renault, Alcatel, big ones)18:27
sisalpbut this can be added as a module for them18:28
sisalpcedk: by the wayyou made a product search including partner's reference for one of them in the past (on oe)18:39
cedksisalp: yes but it is really custom18:40
hoRncedk: can you check my commit if its done right?19:19
cedkhoRn: which one?19:21
sharooncedk: ping20:41
cedksharoon: pong21:04
sharooncedk: just wanted to say hi ;)21:05
cedksharoon: did you see that OE has implemented your sequence module21:05
cedksharoon: in the core of OE21:05
sharooncedk: did not see, i don't follow OE developments21:06
sharooncedk: i hope they have a copyright notice21:06
cedksharoon: but enough different to not share the copyright :-)21:06
sharooncedk: oh i thought so21:06
cedksharoon: need to look at it carefully, to be sure21:06
cedksharoon: is it well going your project?21:07
sharooncedk: they are copycats as always21:07
sharooncedk: all well21:07
sharooncedk: i wanted to clarify something regarding ir_translations21:07
sharooncedk: the constraint in ir_translations is a crazy little query which takes over 5 minutes to execute on our DB server (and its a top spec one)21:07
cedksharoon: check_unique_model ?21:09
sharooncedk: yes21:09
sharooncedk: i did not understand clearly what it does too21:09
cedksharoon: I find the messsage clear21:10
cedksharoon: but for sure it is not very performent21:10
sharooncedk: do you want an explain analyze on that ?21:11
cedksharoon: it could perhaps been implement in postgresql with a partial index21:11
cedksharoon: why not21:11
sharooncedk: can you explain what this constraint is supposed to do ?21:11
cedksharoon: by the way, did you get your passport for the unconference?21:11
sharooncedk: not yet21:12
sharooncedk: they will send me an appointment21:12
sharooncedk: waiting for that21:12
cedksharoon: it ensures that translations of type 'model' are unique21:13
sharooncedk: because modules (and hence models) are dynamically discovered ?21:13
cedksharoon: Fix duplicate translation for issue171721:14
sharooncedk: looking at ticket21:14
cedksharoon: it is a check added to no more have the issue21:17
cedksharoon: but for sure the check should be improved (at least for pg)21:21
sharooncedk: this is from my logs. i am running explain analyze 00000LOG:  duration: 669591.375 ms  statement: SELECT count(1) FROM "ir_translation" WHERE type = E'model' AND res_id != 0 GROUP BY name, res_id, lang, type, src HAVING count(1) > 121:22
cedksharoon: at least you can desactivate it in production21:23
cedksharoon: how many rows in ir_translation ?21:23
sharooncedk: 8 million21:24
sharooncedk: i already disabled it in production21:24
cedksharoon: you can create partial index
cedksharoon: submit an issue to have this check only on non-pg DB21:25
sharooncedk: sure21:26
cedksharoon: if it is your only issue with Tryton, it is wonderful :-)21:26
sharooncedk: well, this is the second scalability issue we found (first was the sequence which we already fixed)21:26
sharooncedk: we have never had any other issue :)21:26
cedksharoon: yep partial index is the solution21:33
cedksharoon: one scalability issue, I know is when loading large XML file like in GNUHealth23:29
sharooncedk: its also because all that is done in one large transaction23:29
cedksharoon: no23:30
sharooncedk: how big is the xml file in GNU health ?23:30
cedksharoon: it is because we store a BrowseRecord for each XML record in a module23:30
sharooncedk: Browse records suck a lot of resources, i have been running our production server with weak refs for over a month now and it seems to work fine and overall memory consumption has dropped23:31
cedksharoon: arround 5M23:31
cedksharoon: even with the LRU patch?23:32
sharooncedk: 5M records or 5M lines ?23:32
cedksharoon: 5Mb23:32
sharooncedk: yes23:32
sharooncedk: ok23:32
cedksharoon: what did you do with weak refs?23:33
sharooncedk: the browse records don't get deleted (GC'd) till the transaction is stopped. When you use a weak ref in browse record to store the cursor the browse record object s deleted23:34
cedksharoon: ho, good tip23:36
sharooncedk: internally for performance we use csv reports which directly write to NamedTemoraryFiles rather than memory and we saw an interesting pattern in a stock report. The report is quite fast but slows down by over 15 times when we add a single column - the cost price23:36
cedksharoon: please submit a patch23:36
sharooncedk: sure23:36
cedksharoon: don't understand the report stuff23:37
sharooncedk: there is a huge performance issue when property field cost price is accessed, i haven't figured where the issue is though23:38
cedksharoon: it is a Function field23:39
cedksharoon: it is this method which is slow I guess23:41
cedksharoon: but
cedksharoon: should improve it23:42
cedksharoon: because I think the slow comes from the processing of value23:42
sharooncedk: ok23:43

Generated by 2.11.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!