From: Alexander Turenko <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org> To: "Alexander V. Tikhonov" <avtikhon@tarantool.org> Cc: Oleg Piskunov <o.piskunov@tarantool.org>, tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v4] Implement perf testing at gitlab-ci Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:41:30 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200218214130.h2wilrsmf2zaku25@tkn_work_nb> (raw) In-Reply-To: <c7d3c933ea4a41ac07dd27fc3c59e28ec1a8bc4e.1581947950.git.avtikhon@tarantool.org> I still think that details might be better, but okay, I see: you need some base now to proceed further. Don't want to block it anymore. I commented the patch below, but didn't perform any changes except a bit reworded commit message. Pushed to master. CCed Kirill. Don't sure how it should look at other release branches: - Whether something need to be changed for 2.3/2.2? - perf_only_template should have "2.3" / "2.2" branch instead of master, that I understood. - Should IMAGE_PERF be tagged as "perf_2.3" / "perf_2.2" instead of "perf_master"? Are benchmarks should be adjusted for those versions and should this lead to such separation base images (or will be handled at runtime with bench-run scripts?). - Whether something need to be changed for 1.10? - At least SQL benchmarks will not work. Should it be handled here or they will be skipped on bench-run side? - Same question re IMAGE_PERF as above. Let's elaborate those questions. After this we can push it downward. WBR, Alexander Turenko. > Implement perf testing at gitlab-ci Changed to: 'gitlab-ci: enable performance testing'. > > Enabled Tarantool performance testing on Gitlab-CI > for release/master branches and "*-perf" named branches. > For this purpose 'perf' and 'cleanup' stages were added > into Gitlab-CI pipeline. > > Performance testing support next benchmarks: > - cbench > - linkbench > - nosqlbench (hash and tree Tarantool run modes) > - sysbench > - tpcc > - ycsb (hash and tree Tarantool run modes) > > Benchmarks use scripts from repository: > http://gitlab.com/tarantool/bench-run Dead link. Changed gitlab.com to github.com. > > Perfomance testing uses docker images, built Fixed typo: 'Perfomance'. > with docker files from bench-run repository: > - perf/ubuntu-bionic:perf_master > parent image with benchmarks only > - perf_tmp/ubuntu-bionic:perf_<commit_SHA> > child images used for testing Tarantool sources Formatted a bit (to fit 72 symbols, but not much less). > Github: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/tree/avtikhon/gitlab-ci-perf > +.perf_only_template: &perf_only_definition > + only: > + - master > + - /^.*-perf$/ > + variables: &perf_vars_definition > + IMAGE_PERF: "${CI_REGISTRY}/${CI_PROJECT_PATH}/perf/ubuntu-bionic:perf_master" > + IMAGE_PERF_BUILT: "${CI_REGISTRY}/${CI_PROJECT_PATH}/perf_tmp/ubuntu-bionic:perf_${CI_COMMIT_SHORT_SHA}" > + The resulting bench-run API looks strage for me: * It expects that a caller will set CI_REGISTRY, CI_REGISTRY_USER, CI_REGISTRY_PASSWORD environment variables, which come from GitLab-CI, but can be set manually. * However it does not use CI_REGISTRY, CI_PROJECT_PATH, CI_COMMIT_SHORT_SHA to choose images name on its own, but expect IMAGE_PERF and IMAGE_PERF_BUILT from a caller. * All those variables have prefix CI_*, not, say, BENCH_RUN_*. > +# Pre-testing part > + > +perf_bootstrap: > + <<: *perf_only_definition > + stage: test > + tags: > + - perf > + script: > + - ${GITLAB_MAKE} perf_prepare There is no reason to use two terms for the same thing: bootstrap and prepare. Also I don't see a reason to extract such one-two-liners into a gitlab.mk. > +# Post-testing part > + > +remove_images: > + <<: *perf_only_definition > + stage: cleanup > + when: always > + tags: > + - perf > + script: > + - ${GITLAB_MAKE} perf_cleanup > + Same as above: there is no reason to name it both 'remove_images' and 'perf_cleanup'.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-18 21:41 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-02-17 14:01 Alexander V. Tikhonov 2020-02-18 21:41 ` Alexander Turenko [this message] 2020-02-19 5:37 ` Alexander Tikhonov 2020-02-21 12:38 ` Alexander Turenko -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2020-02-17 10:00 Alexander V. Tikhonov
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=20200218214130.h2wilrsmf2zaku25@tkn_work_nb \ --to=alexander.turenko@tarantool.org \ --cc=avtikhon@tarantool.org \ --cc=o.piskunov@tarantool.org \ --cc=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \ --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v4] Implement perf testing at gitlab-ci' \ /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