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

Re: svn commit: r1657451 - in /subversion/branches/reuse-ra-session: ./ subversion/libsvn_client/

From: Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 13:25:21 +0300

On 5 February 2015 at 11:33, Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> On 05.02.2015 01:59, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 05.02.2015 01:44, brane_at_apache.org wrote:
>>> Author: brane
>>> Date: Thu Feb 5 00:44:57 2015
>>> New Revision: 1657451
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1657451
>>> Log:
>>> On the reuse-ra-session branch: Add explicit session reuse in libsvn_client.
>> Anyone who's interested in the RA session cache, please take time to
>> review this commit.
>> All tests pass for me (ra_local, ra_svn and ra_dav) and I re-read the
>> diffs about five times to check that sessions are being released to
>> cache only when it's certain that they're valid. But I'd really like to
>> have a few more pairs of eyes on this, because there's potential for
>> some nasty bugs being introduced.
> To get a feeling for what the RA session cache gains us, here are
> summarized stats from a few test runs:
> * client-test:
> request:21 open:13 close:3 release:18 reuse:8 cleanup:0
> * merge_tests.py:
> request:4079 open:3812 close:20 release:3431 reuse:267 cleanup:62
> * externals_tests.py:
> request:1005 open:597 close:5 release:996 reuse:408 cleanup:4
> To get a feeling for what this means: during the externals test run, we
> got about a thousand requests to open a RA session through
> libsvn_client, 40% of which were serviced by the reuse of a previously
> released session. Only 9 sessions were closed due to pool clean-up, 4 of
> which were owned by pools with a lifetime longer than the client
> context's pool.
Wow! That more that I expected. Opening RA session could cost up to 5
TCP connect - 1 roundtrip
SSL handshake - 2 roundtrips
Authenctication - 1 roundtrip
Options request - 1 roundtrip

Total 500-1000 ms for overseas connections.

> Our tests are not an ideal showcase for session reuse, because they run
> a zillion short-lived processes; I expect something like TortoiseSVN
> could benefit from the cache far more. Still, the externals-tests
> results seem to show that even our command-line client can benefit from
> session reuse.
Yes, GUI clients should benefit significantly.

Ivan Zhakov
Received on 2015-02-05 11:28:24 CET

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.