0 bytes/s vs. ∞ bytes/s

0 bytes/s vs. ∞ bytes/s

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Receiving objects: 100% (1003/1003), 1.15 MiB | 0 bytes/s, done.
Receiving objects: 100% (1861/1861), 11.74 MiB | 4.58 MiB/s, done.
Receiving objects: 100% (474/474), 160.72 KiB | 0 bytes/s, done.
Receiving objects: 100% (7190/7190), 26.02 MiB | 6.53 MiB/s, done.

If the connection is too fast to calculate, please report
∞ bytes/s or
inf bytes/s or
? bytes/s or
anything but 0 bytes/s, which means nothing (transmitted.)

Re: 0 bytes/s vs. ∞ bytes/s

[René Scharfe]

Am 07.07.2017 um 17:57 schrieb 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson:
> Receiving objects: 100% (1003/1003), 1.15 MiB | 0 bytes/s, done.
> Receiving objects: 100% (1861/1861), 11.74 MiB | 4.58 MiB/s, done.
> Receiving objects: 100% (474/474), 160.72 KiB | 0 bytes/s, done.
> Receiving objects: 100% (7190/7190), 26.02 MiB | 6.53 MiB/s, done.
> 
> If the connection is too fast to calculate, please report
> ∞ bytes/s or
> inf bytes/s or
> ? bytes/s or
> anything but 0 bytes/s, which means nothing (transmitted.)

I don't know your actual transfer rate, but I would guess it's closer to
zero than to infinity. :)

How about this, though:

-- >8 --
Subject: [PATCH] progress: show overall rate in last update

The values in struct throughput are only updated every 0.5 seconds.  If
we're all done before that time span then the final update will show a
rate of 0 bytes/s, which is misleading if some bytes had been handled.
Remember the start time and show the total throughput instead.

And avoid division by zero by enforcing a minimum time span value of 1
(unit: 1/1024th of a second).  That makes the resulting rate an
underestimation, but it's closer to the actual value than the currently
shown 0 bytes/s.

Reported-by: 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
---
 progress.c | 8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/progress.c b/progress.c
index 29378caa05..73e36d4a42 100644
--- a/progress.c
+++ b/progress.c
@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ struct progress {
 	unsigned delay;
 	unsigned delayed_percent_treshold;
 	struct throughput *throughput;
+	uint64_t start_ns;
 };
 
 static volatile sig_atomic_t progress_update;
@@ -221,6 +222,7 @@ struct progress *start_progress_delay(const char *title, unsigned total,
 	progress->delayed_percent_treshold = percent_treshold;
 	progress->delay = delay;
 	progress->throughput = NULL;
+	progress->start_ns = getnanotime();
 	set_progress_signal();
 	return progress;
 }
@@ -247,8 +249,10 @@ void stop_progress_msg(struct progress **p_progress, const char *msg)
 		struct throughput *tp = progress->throughput;
 
 		if (tp) {
-			unsigned int rate = !tp->avg_misecs ? 0 :
-					tp->avg_bytes / tp->avg_misecs;
+			uint64_t now_ns = getnanotime();
+			unsigned int misecs, rate;
+			misecs = ((now_ns - progress->start_ns) * 4398) >> 32;
+			rate = tp->curr_total / (misecs ? misecs : 1);
 			throughput_string(&tp->display, tp->curr_total, rate);
 		}
 		progress_update = 1;
-- 
2.13.2

Re: 0 bytes/s vs. ∞ bytes/s

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

RS> Subject: [PATCH] progress: show overall rate in last update
RS> Reported-by: 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
RS> Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Thanks!