On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 17:01, John Beranek <john_at_redux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 08/03/11 09:34, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:21, John Beranek <john_at_redux.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 08/03/11 05:34, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 3:26 PM, John Beranek <john_at_redux.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> Hmm...I'm surprised (and disappointed). No one is interested in
>>>>>> Subversion 1.7 being lower performance than 1.6?
>>>>>
>>>>> You're not telling us something we don't already know (go read the
>>>>> archives some time). Many folks are still working on improving the
>>>>> performance of 1.7...so, general complaints aren't going to be
>>>>> terribly productive.
>>>>
>>>> I think "general complaints" is a bit unfair on me.
>>>>
>>>> I posted specific timings using the current trunk code, in case it was
>>>> news to anyone.
>>>>
>>>> I guess from now on I'll just keep my investigations to myself.
>>>>
>>> Hi John,
>>>
>>> I'm really interested of performance tests especially of ra_serf.
>>> Performance degradation of svn import over ra_serf looks very strange.
>>> Could you please provide more details about your configuration?
>>
>> OK, I've been a bit more rigorous on my latest ra_serf import tests. So,
>> on a Fedora 14 x86_64 machine (gcc 4.5.1, APR 1.3.9) I built 1.6.16 with
>> serf 0.7.1, and trunk(r1078338) with serf 0.7.1.
>>
>> I imported the same dataset over HTTP to another server on the LAN. This
>> server runs Apache 2.2.3 with mod_dav_svn 1.6.15, it is a CentOS 5.5
>> machine.
>>
>> So, the timings:
>>
>> 1.6.16 (http-library=neon):
>> real 0m17.105s
>> user 0m1.133s
>> sys 0m1.343s
>>
>> trunk (http-library=neon):
>> real 0m15.881s
>> user 0m0.968s
>> sys 0m1.029s
>>
>> 1.6.16 (http-library=serf):
>> real 2m46.610s
>> user 0m1.277s
>> sys 0m1.543s
>>
>> trunk (http-library=serf):
>> real 2m45.159s
>> user 0m1.057s
>> sys 0m1.169s
>>
>> Now, that is looking like a serious problem, rather different to my
>> previous comparison, which compared a remote ra_neon access to a local
>> ra_serf access.
>>
> Yes, it looks like a serious problem. May I ask you to try build
> Subversion trunk with serf trunk [1] and repeat your tests?
>
> [1] http://serf.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/
Don't the tests show that trunk is slightly faster than 1.6? It seems
like the main thing it shows is that when working with a HTTPv1
server, ra_serf is significantly slower than ra_neon for svn import
(both in 1.6 and trunk).
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
Received on 2011-03-08 15:12:14 CET