On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 10:34:45PM +0100, Petr Rockai wrote: > Nathan Gray <[email protected]> writes: > [snip] > > It is important to me to be able to benchmark current darcs against > > the version of darcs we are using in production, so I will know when I > > can upgrade.
> You need to use a repository that's in darcs1 format for that, and also make > sure the initialise.sh script doesn't convert them to hashed when creating the > playgrounds (it uses the system darcs, keeping defaults). Ah yes. I must have gotten muddled. > > Memory usage is interesting. What darcs-benchmark reports for memory usage > > does not seem accurate. > > > > During the benchmark, in another window, I had a loop running to log > > stats about darcs processes every 60 seconds: > > > > while [ 1 ]; do ps axo > > pid,euser,pri,ni,vsize,rssize,s,%cpu,%mem,cputime,etime,comm,args |grep > > darcs >> process_stats_all.txt; sleep 60; done > > > > So while darcs-benchmark reports that it took darcs 2.0.2 1219.6 seconds > > to check my cap2 repository (which seems fairly accurate), it also > > reports that it used 288MB (which seems quite a bit less than what was > > actually used): > Hm, the 288M figure comes from GHC RTS and is the peak heap size. There's > additional stuff in the running darcs image, but I'm not sure it could account > for the 300M difference. *But* if you are using uncompressed patches, it could > very well be just mmap memory: it gets counted into the memory use of a > process, even if it's just a mapped file (and behaves more like filesystem > cache than like actual allocated memory), IIRC. I did not uncompress them, so am supposing they are compressed patches in the playpen. > > -- check, repo = big-zoo/cap2, bin = darcs211... > > iteration: 1..error: user error (darcs failed with error code 1 > > saying: /home/kolibrie/bin/darcs211 check --no-test +RTS -sstderr > > Repairing patch 51/26411 : Fri Jan 1 00:36:41 EST 1999 cvs > > [snip] > > Writing pristine 4/42 > > [snip] > > Writing pristine 21990/22004 > > cleaning up... 33/75 : whxdata > > [snip] > > cleaning up... 2787/2906 : LinkInputList > > darcs211: out of memory (requested 1048576 bytes) > > ) > Hm, not sure what is in 2.1.1, so can't comment. That is: 2.1.1rc2 (+ 281 patches) > > Benchmarking darcs 2.2.0 got up to about 3GB in about three hours, then > > hung for several days until I got back from vacation: > Hm, there's no 2.2.0 yet -- have you used http://darcs.net/ (and from which > date) or 2.2.0pre1? I have fixed a severe memory leak in 2.2, after the pre1 > release -- if your 2.2 doesn't have my fix for check/repair, it obviously > won't > finish on your big repo with just 4G of RAM. My 2.2.0 is: 2.2.0pre1 (prerelease 1) > To circumvent the hangs, you should probably set some reasonable ulimit. If > that doesn't help, it's alwas possible just to kill the darcs process being > benchmarked, the benchmark will continue where it left off. > > If it's at all possible, please grab > http://repos.mornfall.net/darcs/branch-2.2 > -- this is what will become 2.2.0pre2 on 3rd January bar any release-critical > issues pop up in the meantime. It contains the leak fix mentioned above, so it > should improve check and repair performance drastically. If it doesn't, then > we > have a some bug in there... Will fetch that version of darcs and benchmark against it, reporting back here with results. -kolibrie _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
