Hi all, Thanks to all the volunteers who signed up to participate in darcs benchmarking.
Benchmark volunteers found! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- So far we have Max Battcher : Windows Vista Nathan Gray : Linux Jason Dagit : MacOS X We have also some backup volunteers Stephan Günther : MacOS X (Tiger) Stephan Günther : Linux Jason Dagit : Windows 7 There's no real distinction between the first and backup volunteers (the more the merrier); mostly just a matter of who I think will have an easier time at it. Request zero: please install the following software ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Could all volunteers please ensure that you can cabal install the following: - darcs-2.3.1 (manually rename this afterwards to darcs-2.3.1) - darcs-benchmark - HEAD darcs It may also help to make a test run 1. Make a benchmarking directory 2. darcs-benchmark --get 3. Run darcs-benchmark comparing darcs-2.3.1 and darcs HEAD The results will not be very useful yet, because we're still waiting on the amended version of Luca's http://bugs.darcs.net/patch72 to make it in Benchmarking goals ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I think the three questions we need to answer are, in order of priority. 1. How do Darcs 2.3.1 and Darcs 2.4 compare on hashed repositories? I think we can do this with currently existing tools. NB. Darcs 2.4 also introduces the darcs optimize --pristine command which rearranges the pristine cache of hashed repositories. Perhaps we should also have an extra run to compare unoptimised and optimised pristine too. 2. How do Darcs 2.3.1 with an old-fashioned repository compare with Darcs 2.4 with a hashed repository? This is quite important because we aim for hashed repositories in Darcs 2.4 to be good enough for the GHC Team to switch over completely, for example, replacing their checkpoint and --partial based buildbot workflow with get --lazy http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/2009-September/021370.html Unfortunately, it's not clear how to do this yet. I think we need some more work on darcs-benchmark and soon. 3. How does Darcs 1.0.9 with an old-fashioned repository compare with Darcs 2.4 on a hashed repository? This is useful for organisations which are still deliberately using darcs 1.0.9. It's also good to give us an idea of how much progress we've made (or how much ground we're catching up on) since the days when the Darcs code only had old-fashioned repositories in mind. I suspect that this will be easier to accomplish once we have done the work for #2. I think #1 and #2 are must haves, and #3 is a would-be-nice (but perhaps an easy one if we can do #2). (Please let me know if I've got the wrong benchmarking questions in mind). That's all for now! I'll send a stage 1 mail when we have a clearer idea how to accomplish goal #2 Thanks, everyone :-) -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
