On 10/03/11 15:50, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 18:44, John Beranek <j...@redux.org.uk> wrote: >> On 10/03/11 14:31, Hyrum K Wright wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 6:24 AM, John Beranek <j...@redux.org.uk> wrote: >>>> OK, so I: >>>> >>>> * Changed my benchmark took to allow the test to be reported N times, >>>> and moved to microsecond timers. >>>> * Set up a fresh repository on a 1.6.15 server, with no post-commit >>>> triggers. >>>> >>>> So, with 10 iterations: >>>> ra_neon: 16.01 >>>> ra_serf: 15.94 >>> >>> Having only tangentially followed this thread, I've got a couple of >>> questions: >>> * Do the current subversion+serf fixes solve the the large checkout >>> time problem people have been seeing on trunk? >>> * What other scenarios should we be timing/testing? >>> >>> John, you've been a great help in identifying and testing this. Any >>> chance you could run similar timing comparisons on other Subversion >>> operations and report the results? :) >> >> OK, well, my script has now been checked in to: >> >> https://github.com/jberanek/svn_scripts >> >> Documentation/usage information isn't great (OK, non-existant) yet, but >> I'll work on this. >> >> I've added a checkout test, and here are my results: >> >> 1.6.16, 10 iterations, from a localhost trunk(r1080029) server to a >> local disc: >> ra_neon: 4.49 >> ra_serf: 5.39 >> >> trunk(r1080029), 10 iterations, from a localhost trunk(r1080029) server >> to a local disc: >> ra_neon: 14.94 >> ra_serf: 15.76 >> > Hi John, > > It better to separate network layer tests from WC layer. The following > operations are mostly depends on network layer and server performance: > 1. svn ls / svn ls -R > 2. svn export > 3. svn log
Hmm, OK, but is 'export' truly not WC dependent?? John. -- John Beranek To generalise is to be an idiot. http://redux.org.uk/ -- William Blake
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
