On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 03:40, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I ran the benchmark tests again using latest trunk for server and
> client. The numbers are interesting. See them here so you can see
> table formatting:
> Using Neon, performance is improved across the board. In some cases,
> substantially. The number of HTTP requests were cut from 11,723 down
> to 5,415!
> The story using Serf is not as good. There are a few places where it
> is fastest, namely merge. But there are other cases where it is
> dramatically slower. The number of HTTP requests with Serf is 80,990.
> Looking at the numbers, it seems like Serf is slowest when it comes
> to the areas where it issues all those GET requests, such as checkout
> and update. On other operations it is more inline with Neon. Maybe
> there is more that could be done to speed up those areas or maybe you
> need to get the server under high load for the benefits of the Serf
> approach to manifest? FWIW, I monitored the CPU usage of the server
> during the run. The utilization was low throughout the runs but
> definitely higher when Serf was used. That said, I could also see it
> using both CPU cores when Serf was used, but not with Neon.
> When you are in Berlin next week I hope you can revisit the discussion
> about whether Serf should be our default. Right now, unless there are
> more improvements, I am going to advise that we patch our CollabNet
> binaries so that Neon is the default. We will of course still include
> Serf so that it can be configured but I do not think it makes sense
> for it to be the default if it is going to be considerably slower at
> most operations.
We (VisualSVN) are considering doing the same in our packages.
Another option is to implement non-skelta mode in ra_serf, but Greg
has objections for this way. I hope we can discuss this in Berlin next
Received on 2011-05-12 08:10:36 CEST