On 3/7/2022 4:23 PM, Jeff Hostetler wrote:
>
>
> On 2/24/22 11:21 AM, Derrick Stolee wrote:
>> On 2/15/2022 10:59 AM, Jeff Hostetler via GitGitGadget wrote:
>>> Here is part 3 of my builtin FSMonitor series.
> [...]
>>> Here is performance data from t/perf/p7527-builtin-fsmonitor.sh on a
>>> synthetic repo containing 1M files on a Macbook Pro. It shows the effects of
>>> the untracked cache (uc) and FSMonitor (fsm) on git status.
>>>
>>> $ ./p7527-builtin-fsmonitor.sh
>>> # passed all 67 test(s)
>>> 1..67
>>> Test this tree
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 7527.4: [uc false][fsm false] status after checkout 29.99(3.14+80.12)
>>> 7527.6: [uc false][fsm false] status after big change 73.32(5.11+97.24)
>>> 7527.8: [uc false][fsm false] status after add all 47.80(5.12+90.47)
>>> 7527.10: [uc false][fsm false] status after add dot 49.22(5.16+92.05)
>>> 7527.12: [uc false][fsm false] status after commit 51.53(3.35+100.74)
>>> 7527.14: [uc false][fsm false] status after reset hard 33.74(3.03+85.31)
>>> 7527.16: [uc false][fsm false] status after create untracked files 41.71(3.24+89.75)
>>> 7527.18: [uc false][fsm false] status after clean 34.33(3.07+89.36)
>>>
>>> 7527.20: [uc false][fsm true] status after checkout 29.23(1.94+10.84)
>>> 7527.22: [uc false][fsm true] status after big change 64.23(4.66+24.86)
>>> 7527.24: [uc false][fsm true] status after add all 45.45(4.37+18.70)
>>> 7527.26: [uc false][fsm true] status after add dot 44.42(4.02+17.10)
>>> 7527.28: [uc false][fsm true] status after commit 30.52(1.95+10.91)
>>> 7527.30: [uc false][fsm true] status after reset hard 28.70(2.70+13.89)
>>> 7527.32: [uc false][fsm true] status after create untracked files 28.63(2.59+10.71)
>>> 7527.34: [uc false][fsm true] status after clean 28.97(2.59+10.78)
>>>
>>> 7527.36: [uc true][fsm false] status after checkout 35.06(3.17+86.11)
>>> 7527.38: [uc true][fsm false] status after big change 74.65(5.14+101.50)
>>> 7527.40: [uc true][fsm false] status after add all 49.96(5.22+90.96)
>>> 7527.42: [uc true][fsm false] status after add dot 49.77(5.24+91.72)
>>> 7527.44: [uc true][fsm false] status after commit 36.95(3.27+92.25)
>>> 7527.46: [uc true][fsm false] status after reset hard 33.89(3.18+85.68)
>>> 7527.48: [uc true][fsm false] status after create untracked files 41.44(3.40+92.99)
>>> 7527.50: [uc true][fsm false] status after clean 34.60(3.26+90.19)
>>>
>>> 7527.52: [uc true][fsm true] status after checkout 0.58(0.45+0.10)
>>> 7527.54: [uc true][fsm true] status after big change 65.16(4.91+25.64)
>>> 7527.56: [uc true][fsm true] status after add all 45.43(4.45+18.92)
>>> 7527.58: [uc true][fsm true] status after add dot 15.56(2.57+6.32)
>>> 7527.60: [uc true][fsm true] status after commit 0.98(0.46+0.11)
>>> 7527.62: [uc true][fsm true] status after reset hard 30.30(2.96+14.49)
>>> 7527.64: [uc true][fsm true] status after create untracked files 2.15(1.73+0.40)
>>> 7527.66: [uc true][fsm true] status after clean 1.68(1.56+0.32)
>>
>> The other stylistic thing is this performance test. It would be nice if
>> these tests were grouped by the operation (like "status after checkout")
>> so it is easier to compare the same operation across the matrix definitions.
>>
>> This would require reordering the test definition as well as allowing the
>> different cases to simultaneously live in different repositories. The
>> p2000-sparse-operations.sh has this kind of organization, but you'll need
>> more involved test cases than "run this command".
>
> Yeah, it would be nice to turn this test inside-out so that
> could group the outputs by test case rather than by (uc,fsm)
> combination. That would certainly make it easier to see how
> the two terms affect things.
>
> The problem is I'd either need 4 parallel repos that I could
> setup with each (uc,fsm) pair or I'd need to start/stop the
> daemon and swap out the {.git/index, .git/config} between
> each step. The former is a problem for monorepos. The latter
> is doable, but I'm not sure it is worth the effort right now.
Yeah, that extra data is not something to take lightly.
Reworking this test is not critical right now, so I'll leave it
for another time, if we need it. But, perhaps we could set up
the test to create four _worktrees_ so at least the only
duplication is the working tree and not the entire repository.
(The working tree is still a huge amount of data in some cases,
so this doesn't actually solve the problem, just reduces it.)
Thanks,
-Stolee
