From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 10 19:51:15 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E11E16A4CE for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 19:51:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from silver.he.iki.fi (helenius.fi [193.64.42.241]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1D5A43DA4 for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 19:51:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pete@he.iki.fi) Received: from [193.64.42.172] (hac.vuokselantie10.fi [193.64.42.172]) by silver.he.iki.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99EADBC46; Tue, 10 May 2005 22:51:07 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <428110D2.8070004@he.iki.fi> Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 22:51:46 +0300 From: Petri Helenius User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bakul Shah References: <200505101518.j4AFImSv071163@gate.bitblocks.com> In-Reply-To: <200505101518.j4AFImSv071163@gate.bitblocks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Regression testing (was Re: Performance issue) X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 19:51:15 -0000 This sounds somewhat similar to Solaris dtrace stuff? Pete Bakul Shah wrote: >This thread makes me wonder if there is value in runing >performance tests on a regular basis. This would give an >early warning of any peformance loss and can be a useful >forensic tool (one can pinpoint when some performance curve >changed discontinuously even though at the time of change it >may be too small to be noticed). Over a period of time >one can gain a view of how the performance evolves. > >This would not be a single metric but a set of low and high >level measures: such as syscall overhead, interrupt overhead, >specific h/w devices, disk and fs performance for various >filesystems and file sizes, networking data and pkt >throughput, routing performance, VM, other subsystems, effect >of SMP, various threading libraries, scaling with number of >users/programs/cpus/memory, typical applications under normal >and stressed loads, compile time for the system and kernel >etc. etc. etc. > >The setup would allow for easy addition of new benchmarks >(the only way anything like this can be bootstrapped). Of >course, one would need to record disk/processor/memory speed >and capacities + kernel config options, system build tools >and their options to interpret the results as best as >possible. For the results to be useful the setup has to >remain as stable as possible for a long time. > >[While I am dreaming...] A follow on project would be to >create visualization tools -- mainly graphing and comparing >graphs. It would be neat if one can click on a performance >graph to zoom in or see commits made during some selected >period. > >Such a detailed look, combined with profiling can help people >focus on specific hotspots & feel good about any improvements >they are making. This can be a great way to rope in new >people;-) >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > >