[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Performance benchmarks

From: John Beranek <john_at_redux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 23:25:24 +0100

On 28/03/2011 23:00, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 5:42 PM, John Beranek <john_at_redux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 25/03/2011 17:33, Mark Phippard wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have been working on a framework for writing tests to record
>>> performance. I have something good enough to share:
>>
>> May I make an observation about these benchmarks...?
>>
>> When I provided some benchmarks that included 'checkout' tests I was
>> specifically asked to make tests that separate WC and RA functionality.
>>
>> I did this, released results, and the (portable) benchmark code.
>
> If your point is why didn't I use your code it is becuase it is in
> Perl and I do not know Perl. I also did not see any conversation
> happening around your benchmarks (or else I would not have bothered to
> try get things going again).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to put down your efforts, just
restating some things from the previous discussion that did seem to make
sense to me.

For reference, the thread I'm talking about was entitled "Subversion
trunk (r1078338) HTTP(/WC?) performance problems?"
<http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?group=gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.devel&article=126473>.

> I have tried to make it clear that this is just something I decided to
> work on to help. Whether it means anything or not or whether we use
> these benchmarks to make decisions remains to be seen. Feel free to
> try to revive discussion around the tests you wrote, I will not be
> offended.

My benchmark script certainly can't be considered "finished", but I had
added extra individual, averages tests to it. The tests that I got
around to implementing were mostly RA-related, but I could certainly
look at adding some more tests on the WC side. I was somewhat shot down
for showing WC performance problems, because of a "We know about that"
sentiment.

>> Now Mark has released a new set of benchmarks, which don't separate WC
>> and RA functionality. No one has (yet) noted this fact. ;)
>
> I focused my tests on WC functions. I am not sure what you mean by RA
> functionality. Some of our biggest problems are in walking the tree
> during things like update and commit.

Well, as I understand it, a 'checkout' over HTTP is affected both by RA
performance _and_ WC performance. So, my benchmarks were modified to do
'export' instead, to separate out the RA component. Equally if you
wanted to separate out the WC component, you'd do 'checkout' operations
with ra_local, or (as in your tests) other WC operations like
'proplist', 'status' etc.

> Anyway, I was not trying to offend you. I just wanted to help and I
> have no desire to learn Perl (or even Python which obviously would
> have been preferred). I was going to find the email where you posted
> your tests, but since I never recalled anyone else running them or
> discussing them I did not see the benefit in doing so and it would not
> have accomplished my goal to help.

No offence taken, I too am just trying to help the testing effort.

John.

-- 
John Beranek                         To generalise is to be an idiot.
http://redux.org.uk/                                 -- William Blake
Received on 2011-03-29 00:25:57 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.