Hi Victoria,
On Wed, 31 Aug 2022, Victoria Dye via GitGitGadget wrote:
> From: Victoria Dye <vdye@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Create 'p9210-scalar.sh' for testing Scalar performance and comparing
> performance of Git operations in Scalar registrations and standard
> repositories. Example results:
>
> Test this tree
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 9210.2: scalar clone 14.82(18.00+3.63)
> 9210.3: git clone 26.15(36.67+6.90)
> 9210.4: git status (scalar) 0.04(0.01+0.01)
> 9210.5: git status (non-scalar) 0.10(0.02+0.11)
> 9210.6: test_commit --append --no-tag A (scalar) 0.08(0.02+0.03)
> 9210.7: test_commit --append --no-tag A (non-scalar) 0.13(0.03+0.11)
Excellent!
> [...]
> +
> +test_compare_perf () {
> + command="$@"
> + test_perf "$command (scalar)" "
> + (
> + cd scalar-clone/src &&
> + $command
> + )
> + "
> +
> + test_perf "$command (non-scalar)" "
> + (
> + cd git-clone &&
> + $command
> + )
> + "
> +}
> +
> +test_compare_perf git status
> +test_compare_perf test_commit --append --no-tag A
Given the small numbers presented in the commit message, I suspect that
even so much as running the command in a subshell might skew the timings
at least on Windows, where subshells are very, very expensive.
Given that both `git` and `test_commit` understand the `-C <directory>`
syntax, this variant would resolve my concern:
test_compare_perf () {
command=$1
shift
args="$*"
test_perf "$command (scalar)" "
$command -C scalar-clone/src $args
"
test_perf "$command (non-scalar)" "
$command -C git-clone $args
"
}
What do you think?
Ciao,
Dscho
