[Contrib: Evaluation System] provider not being called
Charles Hedrick
hedrick at rutgers.edu
Wed Sep 29 06:48:15 PDT 2010
We're going to do further testing to see whether we have a problem. I'm the performance guy, but I'm not an expert on this particular application. I saw things missing that I expected to see, but this may just have been due to the state those particular assessments were in. Now that I know what's going on, we can fix any problems with the providers.
However there are two things that I consider disabling. We've probably going to go back to 1.2 for this semester and work on 1.3 with a target of next semester:
* We consider the use of snapshots as a problem. I see your issue, but from the user point of view it's broken the application. If you continue using a snapshot we're going to need a way to update it.
* I'm bothered by the extreme slowness of "my surveys." It looks like the code that deals with the snapshot is significantly slower than our provider code. We've haven't done enough testing to know whether that page is the only place with this problem.
I can fix both of these things locally, but I'd rather not do it with only 3 weeks left until we need to start using evaluations. I'd also like to agree on a design with others in the community if possible. My suggestions are:
* If possible return to using the providers.
* If this isn't possible, provide a way to do a resync. Although we'd do it in the early morning, performance would still be a concern.
* If I have to fix "my surveys" I'll probably do it by rewriting the database access in the main loop. My first thought is to bypass genericDAO and hibernate, but it may be that a more specific query through hibernate would work. I suspect the whole loop could be done with a single query, which would probably make the hibernate overhead insignificant (assuming it can be made to issue the right query).
On Sep 28, 2010, at 10:02 AM, Aaron Zeckoski wrote:
> Jim,
> That is correct. The group provider is only consulted when setting up
> the evals or updating them. Otherwise, the internal DB groups records
> are used. This was done to remove the bottlenecks and performance
> issues related to providers which were not written as efficiently. It
> also simplified a lot of the logic by removing complex merges of data
> from various sources.
>
> For the rutgers situation, it may be beneficial to examine the groups
> tables and see if data is missing. If the groups tables have the data
> but the users still are unable to access things then there might be
> something wrong.
>
> -AZ
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Jim Eng <jimeng at umich.edu> wrote:
>> I am following this discussion closely because we are hoping to move to a
>> newer version of evalsys. It seems to me that Aaron Z told us a year or so
>> ago that the way the group provider works had changed at some point.
>> If I recall correctly, in early versions of evalsys, the provider was
>> consulted frequently while handling user requests. In trunk (or 1.3.x), I
>> think he said that the group information is stored internally and the group
>> provider is consulted occasionally to update it. That was done to
>> streamline queries that matched users with evals by group membership, IIRC.
>>
>> Is this a correct description? If so, your question might be why the group
>> info is not being persisted adequately within sakai, rather than why the
>> group provider is not being consulted in handling particular requests.
>> Jim
>>
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2010, at 9:21 AM, Aaron Watters wrote:
>>
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> I work with Chuck at Rutgers. I will try to answer your questions and Chuck
>> can
>> correct me if he feels the need.
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Richard C. Moyer II <rmoyer at umd.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Charles,
>>>
>>> Here at Maryland we also use the eval group provider, but
>>> unfortunately, I cannot reproduce your error. Currently I'm in the middle of
>>> testing evaluation trunk, revision 70243, against our config and providers
>>> with the hope of migrating to sakai 2.7.
>>>
>>> To help trouble shoot your situation, we'll need a little more
>>> details.
>>>
>>> 1. 'We're not seeing people in our evaluations' - are you signing on as a
>>> student and there are no evaluations or are signing on as an instructor or
>>> admin?
>>>
>>
>> We tried both. The students see no evaluations and the admins see 0
>> students in the evaluations.
>>
>>> 2. 'Our evaluations come entirely from the Rutgers provider.' - are you
>>> building your evaluations outside of the sakai evaluation tool and importing
>>> in or are you building the evaluation using this tool and your groups,
>>> students, instructors, and TA come from your provider?
>>>
>>
>> We import the evaluation data directly into the database.
>>
>>>
>>> 3. 'old code' do you have a date or revision number?
>>>
>> I believe it was the 1.2 stable release.
>>
>>>
>>> 4. 'new code' do you have a date or revision number?
>>>
>>
>> 1.3 RC 2.
>>
>>>
>>> 5. what are the results from the Test EvalGroupProvider from the
>>> Administrate screen? As an admin, student & groupId.
>>> Are you getting back Rutger's IDs or sakai IDs?
>>>
>>
>> "Unexpected error" with the following (abbreviated) traceback in
>> catalina.out
>>
>> 2010-09-28 09:05:03,200 WARN (RenderHandlerBracketer.java:107) - <Exception
>> rendering view: >
>> java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Cannot add leaf component with ID
>> summary-link of class uk.org.ponder.rsf.components.UIInternalLink as a child
>> of component with ID viewroot of class uk.org.ponder.rsf.view.ViewRoot
>> since it would displace an existing child of the same name.
>> Please remove the existing component first.
>> at
>> uk.org.ponder.rsf.components.UIContainer.addComponent(UIContainer.java:142)
>> at
>> uk.org.ponder.rsf.components.UIInternalLink.make(UIInternalLink.java:40)
>> at
>> org.sakaiproject.evaluation.tool.producers.AdminTestEGProviderProducer.fillComponents(AdminTestEGProviderProducer.java:133)
>> at
>> uk.org.ponder.rsf.view.support.ViewCollector.fillComponents(ViewCollector.java:56)....
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 6. are you using a UserDirectoryProvider?
>>
>> It doesn't look like it. Should we be?
>> The Rutgers interface implements the following signature
>>
>> public class RutgersEvalGroupsProvider implements
>> org.sakaiproject.evaluation.providers.EvalGroupsProvider {...}
>>
>>>
>>> The summaryProducer, and supporting code has gone through several
>>> enhancements and re-writes over the years. It's possible that depending on
>>> how old your code is that your caught in a void that has since been fixed.
>>>
>>> Please let us know this info and perhaps we can dig a little deeper into
>>> the code.
>>
>> Thanks for your attention. -- Aaron Watters (aaron at rutgers.edu)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> evaluation mailing list
>> evaluation at collab.sakaiproject.org
>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/evaluation
>>
>> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to evaluation-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org
>> with a subject of "unsubscribe"
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> evaluation mailing list
>> evaluation at collab.sakaiproject.org
>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/evaluation
>>
>> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to evaluation-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org
>> with a subject of "unsubscribe"
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Aaron Zeckoski - Software Engineer - http://tinyurl.com/azprofile
> _______________________________________________
> evaluation mailing list
> evaluation at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/evaluation
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to evaluation-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2669 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/evaluation/attachments/20100929/e0d1c346/attachment.bin
More information about the evaluation
mailing list