-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 288
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
perf(cmd-api-server): add continuous benchmarking with JMeter #2672
Comments
Hello @petermetz , upon trying the benchmarkjs, it is working well and fine when testing the fibonacci sequence as benchmark performance testing. However, when trying to make it to test the connector besu contract, which is in typescript file format, it is requiring that the ts files would be transpiled to js file format before it can be used for performance testing. Transpiling was not the ideal solution because it would need to transpile whenever it needs to test with different contract or package. With that, we tried looking for another library under jmeter that is for typescript but to no avail. What can you suggest, should we find a different library that can use the contract in typescript file format or should we park the ticket for now? Thank you. |
@ruzell22 No worries, I'll help out! |
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: #2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary change: --------------- This is the ice-breaker for some work that got stuck related to this issue: hyperledger-cacti#2672 The used benchamking library (benchmark.js) is old but solid and has almost no dependencies which means that we'll be in the clear longer term when it comes to CVEs popping up. The benchmarks added here are very simple and measure the throughput of the API server's Open API spec providing endpoints. The GitHub action that we use is designed to do regression detection and reporting but this is hard to verify before actually putting it in place as we cannot simulate the CI environment's clone on a local environment. The hope is that this change will make it so that if someone tries to make a code change that will lower performance significantly, then we can catch that at the review stage instead of having to find out later. Secondary change: ----------------- 1. Started using tsx in favor of ts-node because it appers to be about 5% faster when looking at the benchmark execution. It also claims to have less problems with ESM compared to ts-node so if this initial trial goes well we could later on decide to swap out ts-node with it project-wide. Signed-off-by: Peter Somogyvari <peter.somogyvari@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: #2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Primary Changes --------------- 1. Added continuous benchmarking using JMeter that reports performance in cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu using one of its endpoint. fixes: hyperledger-cacti#2672 Signed-off-by: ruzell22 <ruzell.vince.aquino@accenture.com>
Description
https://github.com/benchmark-action/github-action-benchmark
Acceptance Criteria
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: