refactor(perception_rviz_plugin): only delete markers with unused MarkersIDs during updates.

[Owen-Liuyuxuan]

Description

We have observed issues related to the processing speed of RVIZ (perception plugin) under scenarios with large amounts of detectable objects.

After profiling, we note that PredictedObjectsDisplay clears / re-adds all markers during updates with new messages, and this behavior is related to the increasing processing time.

By only deleting old marker ids not used in the newest frame, and allowing RVIZ to directly modify the old markers instead of re-adding them, this PR should improve the processing efficiency of PredictedObjectsDisplay at scenes with lots of objects.

Related links

Private Profiling Results

Tests performed

The tests are performed on the private ROSbag

Profiling Results:

The "update" function originally takes up (1086 + 8759 + 5006) * 1e-6 = 0.014 seconds on average. Now it takes (803 + 3217) * 1e-6 = 0.004 seconds on average. Selective Delete improved significantly on the time consumed in the update function.

Notice: The time is measured on my personal computer and does not represent the exact runtime on the deployment environment.

Notes for reviewers

Interface changes

This PR will add a public "deleteMarker" method in object_polygon_display_base.hpp.

Effects on system behavior

Pre-review checklist for the PR author

The PR author must check the checkboxes below when creating the PR.

• I've confirmed the contribution guidelines.
• The PR follows the pull request guidelines.

In-review checklist for the PR reviewers

The PR reviewers must check the checkboxes below before approval.

• The PR follows the pull request guidelines.
• The PR has been properly tested.
• The PR has been reviewed by the code owners.

Post-review checklist for the PR author

The PR author must check the checkboxes below before merging.

• There are no open discussions or they are tracked via tickets.
• The PR is ready for merge.

After all checkboxes are checked, anyone who has write access can merge the PR.

[shmpwk]

LGTM

[shmpwk]

@taikitanaka3 @1222-takeshi Could you approve this as a codeowner?

[taikitanaka3]

lgtm

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (e017725) 15.09% compared to head (964b418) 15.09%.
Report is 15 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #4783   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   15.09%   15.09%           
=======================================
  Files        1568     1568           
  Lines      108130   108128    -2     
  Branches    33173    33165    -8     
=======================================
  Hits        16321    16321           
- Misses      74031    74037    +6     
+ Partials    17778    17770    -8     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
differential	0.00% <0.00%> (?)
total	15.09% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️	Carriedforward from e017725

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
...e/object_detection/object_polygon_display_base.hpp	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ude/object_detection/predicted_objects_display.hpp	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...src/object_detection/predicted_objects_display.cpp	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ior_velocity_detection_area_module/src/manager.cpp	52.00% <ø> (+12.60%)	⬆️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.