Skip to content
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

benchmark: use much smaller values for n in some http tests #14002

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

psmarshall
Copy link
Contributor

@psmarshall psmarshall commented Jun 30, 2017

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

benchmark

The n values here are really, really high right now, and we can still get high confidence (3 stars) with this much lower n value. This makes the benchmarks run a lot faster without sacrificing accuracy.

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added benchmark Issues and PRs related to the benchmark subsystem. http Issues or PRs related to the http subsystem. labels Jun 30, 2017
@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Jun 30, 2017

No comment on the changes themselves, but the commit subsystem should be benchmark, not test.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Jun 30, 2017

Ping @nodejs/benchmarking @mscdex

@psmarshall psmarshall changed the title test: use much smaller values for n in some http tests benchmark: use much smaller values for n in some http tests Jul 24, 2017
@psmarshall
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cjihrig Thanks, I've updated the subsystem.

Copy link
Member

@BridgeAR BridgeAR left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just checked the benchmarks and with these low numbers the benchmark is not fully limited by the CPU and the numbers change to what they would be with higher n.
It will depend on the CPU but I would not recommend to go much below 5e7. I normally always change n when I run benchmarks locally depending on if I want to have a high accuracy or a glimpse at the likely outcome.

@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member

BridgeAR commented Sep 8, 2017

Ping @psmarshall would you mind updating the numbers once more?

@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member

I decided to land this as is even with my comment. We can always increase the numbers when running the benchmarks locally if needed.

Landed in 8a968e4

@BridgeAR BridgeAR closed this Sep 19, 2017
BridgeAR pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2017
PR-URL: #14002
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 20, 2017
PR-URL: #14002
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Qard pushed a commit to Qard/ayo that referenced this pull request Sep 21, 2017
PR-URL: nodejs/node#14002
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Qard pushed a commit to Qard/ayo that referenced this pull request Sep 21, 2017
PR-URL: nodejs/node#14002
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 17, 2017
PR-URL: #14002
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Oct 17, 2017
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 25, 2017
PR-URL: #14002
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Nov 3, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
benchmark Issues and PRs related to the benchmark subsystem. http Issues or PRs related to the http subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants