git@vger.kernel.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Jeff Hostetler <git@jeffhostetler.com>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
	"Jeff King" <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>,
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>,
	Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: I made a flame graph renderer for git's trace2 output
Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 14:22:25 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d1f9a2f4-500d-d5f6-af3d-75d3fdb1323b@jeffhostetler.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y33evuop.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>



On 5/10/2019 5:57 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> 
> On Fri, May 10 2019, Jeff King wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 05:09:58PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>>
>>> As noted in TODOs in the script there's various stuff I'd like to do
>>> better, and this also shows how we need a lot more trace regions to get
>>> granular data.
>>
>> Hmm. My gut reaction was: doesn't "perf record -g make test" already
>> give us that granular data? I know "perf" isn't available everywhere,
>> but the idea of the FlameGraph repo is that it takes input from a lot of
>> sources (though I don't know if it supports any Windows-specific formats
>> yet, which is presumably a point of interesting to trace-2 authors).
>>
>> But having generated such a flamegraph, it's not all that helpful. It
>> mainly tells us that we spend a lot of time on fork/exec. Which is no
>> surprise, since the test suite is geared not towards heavy workloads,
>> but lots of tiny functionality tests.
>>
>> TBH, I'm not sure that flame-graphing the test suite is going to be all
>> that useful in the long run. It's going to be heavily weighted by the
>> types of things the test suite does. Flamegraphs are good for
>> understanding where your time is going for a particular workload, but
>> the workload of the test suite is not that interesting.
>>
>> And once you do have a particular workload of interest that you can
>> replay, then I think the granular "perf" results really can be helpful.
>>
>> I think the trace2 flamegraph would be most useful if you were
>> collecting across a broad spectrum of workloads done by a user. You
>> _can_ do that with perf or similar tools, but it can be a bit awkward.
>> I do wonder how painful it would be to alias "git" to "perf record git"
>> for a day or something.
> 
> Yeah I should have mentioned that I'm mainly linking to the test suite
> rendering as a demo.
> 
> My actual use-case for this is to see what production nodes are spending
> their time on, similar to what Microsoft is doing with their use of this
> facility.
> 
> The test suite serves as a really good test-case for the output, and to
> stress-test my aggregation script, since we're pretty much guaranteed to
> run all our commands, and cover a lot of unusual cases.
> 
> It also shows that we've got a long way to go in improving the trace2
> facility, i.e. adding region enter/leave for some of the things we spend
> the most time on.
> 

Very nice!

Yes, there is more work to do to add more regions to get more
granular data for interesting/problematic things.  My primary
goal in this phase has been to get the basic machinery in place
and be vetted with some universally interesting regions, such as
reading/writing the index and the phases of status.

Going forward, we can trivially (permanently) add new regions as we
want.  I tend to use temporary "experimental" regions during my perf
investigations so that I don't clutter up the mainline source with
uninteresting noise.

WRT the TODO's in your script:

[] I don't think data events will be useful for your usage.  The data
values are orthogonal to the time values.

[] I would add the child_start/_exit events to the stack.  This will
give you the names of non-builtin/shell commands and hooks.  The
various "child_class" and "use_shell" and "hook_name" fields will help
you avoid duplicate stack frames (which you'll get for builtin
commands).

Jeff

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-20 18:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-10 15:09 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-05-10 16:38 ` Derrick Stolee
2019-05-10 17:00   ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-05-20 18:49     ` Jeff Hostetler
2019-05-10 21:03 ` Jeff King
2019-05-10 21:57   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-05-20 18:22     ` Jeff Hostetler [this message]
2019-05-21 14:19       ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-05-21 20:46         ` Jeff Hostetler

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=d1f9a2f4-500d-d5f6-af3d-75d3fdb1323b@jeffhostetler.com \
    --to=git@jeffhostetler.com \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=avarab@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=steadmon@google.com \
    --cc=stolee@gmail.com \
    /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 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).