Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[BUG] Seeing a significant difference in the time taken to complete the analysis (Windup:3 min34 sec vs Kantra:211m14.944) with the airsonic.war sample #170

Closed
1 task done
kthatipally opened this issue Mar 6, 2024 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. priority/high triage/accepted Indicates an issue or PR is ready to be actively worked on.

Comments

@kthatipally
Copy link
Contributor

Is there an existing issue for this?

  • I have searched the existing issues

Konveyor version

v0.3.0

Priority

Undefined (Default)

Current Behavior

Issue:

We've observed a substantial variance (~3 hrs difference) in the analysis duration between Windup and Kantra for airsonic.war file.

More details about the sample run:

  • Sample: https://github.com/airsonic/airsonic/releases/tag/v10.6.2 (airsonic.war)
  • Windup version used: 6.3.4.Final
  • Kantra version used: v0.3.0
  • Time taken to complete the analysis and generate static report: 3.4 minutes.
  • Time taken to complete the analysis and generate static report: Using podman + kantra with v0.3.0, 211m14.944.
  • Arguments: --input, --output, --overwrite, --target (cloud-readiness)
  • Kantra Command: time ./kantra analyze --input airsonic.war --output report-kantra-v0.3.0 -target cloud-readiness --overwrite
  • windup command: time ./windup-cli --input airsonic.war --target cloud-readiness --output report-windup --batchMode --overwrite
  • Static report data after analysis:
    Windup:
    - Total Incidents: 1190 
    - Total Issues: 51
    - Total Tags: 45
    - Story Points 1145
    Kantra:
    - Total Incidents: 6489 
    - Total Issues: 15
    - Total Tags: 12
    - Story Points: 24160

Expected Behavior

Our expectation is for Kantra to complete the analysis in a timeframe comparable to Windup. Additionally, we are keen on understanding any design differences that might contribute to this discrepancy, considering both tools operate with different engines.

How Reproducible

Always (Default)

Steps To Reproduce

OS: Linux

  • Kantra Command:
    podman cp $(podman create --name kantra-download quay.io/konveyor/kantra:v0.3.0):/usr/local/bin/kantra . && podman rm kantra-download
    export RUNNER_IMG=quay.io/konveyor/kantra:v0.3.0
    time ./kantra analyze --input airsonic.war --output report-kantra-v0.3.0 -target cloud-readiness --overwrite

  • Windup command:
    Download and extract https://windup.github.io/downloads/ zip:
    cd [WindupRootFolder]/bin
    time ./windup-cli --input airsonic.war --target cloud-readiness --output report-windup --batchMode --overwrite

Environment

- OS:
  -     Fedora Linux
  -     Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6700 CPU @ 3.40GHz
  -     32 GiB RAM
  -     Running on an SSD

Anything else?

Attached the report zip:
kantra-report-2.zip
windup-report.zip

@kthatipally kthatipally added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Mar 6, 2024
@konveyor-ci-bot
Copy link

This issue is currently awaiting triage.
If contributors determine this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.
The triage/accepted label can be added by org members.

@konveyor-ci-bot konveyor-ci-bot bot added the needs-priority Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. label Mar 6, 2024
@pranavgaikwad pranavgaikwad self-assigned this Mar 7, 2024
@pranavgaikwad pranavgaikwad added priority/high triage/accepted Indicates an issue or PR is ready to be actively worked on. and removed needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Mar 7, 2024
@pranavgaikwad
Copy link
Contributor

@kthatipally Thank you for reporting the issue. I am able to reproduce this and my initial investigation suggests that we are decompiling more files than necessary that may be causing the slowdown. We are looking into a solution.

@pranavgaikwad
Copy link
Contributor

pranavgaikwad commented Mar 8, 2024

We found the issue responsible for consuming a big chunk of time, fixed here konveyor/analyzer-lsp#530. This should bring down the overall time down to 10m from over 200m total. There's still a follow up issue we would like to solve to improve further captured here: #172

@pranavgaikwad
Copy link
Contributor

Hey folks, we have addressed all performance issues in binary mode. @shawn-hurley also merged the last piece we needed to address the issue around incidents from open source deps konveyor/analyzer-lsp#556. I think this issue can now be closed. Please feel free to re-open if needed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. priority/high triage/accepted Indicates an issue or PR is ready to be actively worked on.
Projects
Status: ✅ Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants