From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] refs: fix interleaving hook calls with reference-transaction hook
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 11:49:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200807094946.GA1758126@tanuki.pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200807093239.GA1228157@coredump.intra.peff.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2470 bytes --]
On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 05:32:39AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 11:04:12AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
>
> > > It's perhaps more justifiable when there isn't a hook (we're still just
> > > paying that one access(), but it's proportionally bigger). I kind of
> > > doubt it's measurable, though, since a ref write requires a bunch of
> > > syscalls anyway.
> >
> > Yeah, this really was done to not have to pay a performance penalty if
> > updating thousands of refs if no reference-transaction hook exists. E.g.
> > if doing a non-atomic push of n reference, we'd have n calls to
> > access(3P). See [1] for reference.
> >
> > I've just did another quick benchmark without the cache, and it still
> > consistently shows a non-zero performance hit without it:
> >
> > Test pks-reftx-hook-interleaving no-cache
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 1400.2: update-ref 2.82(2.13+0.81) 2.86(2.19+0.78) +1.4%
> > 1400.3: update-ref --stdin 0.22(0.07+0.15) 0.22(0.07+0.15) +0.0%
>
> I'm skeptical that those results are useful. In the first test, we're
> running update-ref 1000 times, so:
>
> - the cache shouldn't be helping at all, since we only have one ref to
> update (well, I guess once for "prepare" and once for "commit", so
> really it's saving one syscall total per process).
>
> - I'd expect a lot of noise because we're spending most of our time in
> starting up the process
>
> In the second test, we run 1000 ref operations per update-ref process.
> So we should be cutting down on our hook-lookup overhead by a factor of
> 1000. Yet it shows no improvement.
>
> That implies you're just seeing noise. And indeed, with the patch below
> I get:
>
> Test HEAD^ HEAD
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 1400.2: update-ref 1.93(1.57+0.42) 1.91(1.55+0.42) -1.0%
> 1400.3: update-ref --stdin 0.07(0.02+0.05) 0.07(0.02+0.05) +0.0%
>
> Running it a second time gets me +0.5%. :)
Yeah, it's also been my take that OS-level overhead is probably going to
matter more than those access calls, and I argued such back when I
proposed the hook. So I'm perfectly happy to see this caching mechanism
go.
Should I re-post a v2 with your patch and my test?
Patrick
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-07 9:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-07 7:05 [PATCH] refs: fix interleaving hook calls with reference-transaction hook Patrick Steinhardt
2020-08-07 7:58 ` Jeff King
2020-08-07 9:04 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2020-08-07 9:32 ` Jeff King
2020-08-07 9:49 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2020-08-07 17:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-07 19:00 ` Jeff King
2020-08-07 18:21 ` Jeff King
2020-08-07 19:26 ` Junio C Hamano
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
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200807094946.GA1758126@tanuki.pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).