From: "Oleg Piskunov" <o.piskunov@tarantool.org> To: "Sergey Bronnikov" <sergeyb@tarantool.org> Cc: "Oleg Piskunov" <o.piskunov@tarantool.org>, tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v1] bench-run: submit perf results into database Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:28:39 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <1587990519.794010688@f101.i.mail.ru> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20200423092838.GA84748@pony.bronevichok.ru> [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4002 bytes --] Sergey, thanks a lot for the review. >1. sync() can be asynchonous operation so we should wait it or somehow make >sure it has finished. >7. sync() can be asynchonous operation, we should wait it to make sure >it has finished. >17. the same comment as above regarding sync() The «sync» behaviour can be asynchronous, however, modern Linux has been waiting for the recording to finish. Any way I will add checking exit status from sync. >2. What does '500' mean? Let's move magic numbers to constants. Sure. Will fix it. >3. As far as I understand cbench_runner.lua wrote two files >cbench_output_memtx_write.txt and cbench_output_vinyl_write.txt, you >pass filenames as arguments. On next step we should extract interested >numbers from these files. But cbench_output_memtx_write.txt is unused >here. And how other files were created: cbench_output_memtx.txt and >cbench_output_vinyl_fsync.txt? There are 3 runs for cbench with different parameters which produce 3 output files: cbench_output_memtx.txt cbench_output_vinyl_fsync.txt cbench_output_vinyl_write.txt which are parsed to 4 results files. >4. Lines with grep/sed looks absolutely unreadable. Please split lines, like below: > grep "^?tab" cbench_output_memtx.txt | > sed "s/.*name=//"| sed "s/¶m=/:/"| sed "s/cb\./cb\.memtx\./" | > tee -a cbench_result.txt > grep "^?tab" cbench_output_vinyl_fsync.txt | > sed "s/.*name=//"| sed "s/¶m=/:/"| sed "s/cb\./cb\.vinyl\.fsync\./"| > tee -a cbench_result.txt >6. set -u >9. It is not clear why filemask includes zero at the beginning. >10. please remove commented lines or uncomment them >12. you can implement the same body of function much simpler: > with open(filename) as raw_data: > return raw_data.readlines() >13. you can implement the same body of function much simpler: > with open(filename) as raw_data: > return raw_data.readlines()[-1][0] 14. Deviations >16. set -u >17(b). filemask for *.xlog and *.snap Refactoring. I’ve added changes you suggested. >5. Running of publish.py will broke if we will move repo to another > directory. Let's use relative path to publish.py. >8. Running of publish.py will broke if we will move repo to another > directory. Let's use relative path to publish.py. >11. Running of publish.py will broke if we will move repo to another > directory. Let's use relative path to publish.py. >15. Running of publish.py will broke if we will move repo to another > directory. Let's use relative path to publish.py. >18. Running of publish.py will broke if we will move repo to another > directory. Let's use relative path to publish.py. >21. Running of publish.py will broke if we will move repo to another >directory. Let's use relative path to publish.py. This absolute path from container root. As we agreed it will be kept. >19. cbench script uses physcpubind equal to 1, why we set exact these >numbers and why physcpubind has not the same set of numbers? For performance testing we are using servers with 2 processors and each processor have few (6) cores. For stable results we bind tasks to single proc or even single core. The difference can be because of bench requirement (as Tarantool can run multithread execution). So this is still open question how to do correctly binding, but for now I would suggest to keep this parameters unchanged. >20. What does "l" variable mean? This variables changes in range (for l in a b c d e f ; do) and runs different workloads: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3014 Apr 24 07:24 workloada -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3050 Apr 24 07:24 workloadb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3036 Apr 24 07:24 workloadc -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3399 Apr 24 07:24 workloadd -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3558 Apr 24 07:24 workloade -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3149 Apr 24 07:24 workloadf >22. Why do we need gperftools here? Possible artefact from debugging phase a long time ago. Doesn't need for perf testing anymore. Removing. -- Oleg Piskunov [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5530 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-27 12:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-04-22 10:18 Олег Пискунов 2020-04-22 10:57 ` Alexander Tikhonov 2020-04-23 9:28 ` Sergey Bronnikov 2020-04-27 12:28 ` Oleg Piskunov [this message] 2020-04-29 10:07 ` Oleg Piskunov -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2020-04-19 16:28 Олег Пискунов 2020-04-20 17:42 ` Alexander Tikhonov 2020-04-21 6:14 ` Oleg Piskunov
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=1587990519.794010688@f101.i.mail.ru \ --to=o.piskunov@tarantool.org \ --cc=sergeyb@tarantool.org \ --cc=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \ --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v1] bench-run: submit perf results into database' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox